Re: [WISPA] DNS Name Resolver for WISP

[John J. Thomas]

As an ISP, you might consider blocking malware sites.  OpenDNS used to be free 
for anyone that wanted to use it,  businesses included, but they changed their 
terms of service.  What they told us was the free service used a database that 
didn't get updated very frequently,  and filtered about 5000 malware sites. 
When you used the paid for service, there were like 100,000 malware sites in 
that database. We met with them awhile back, when they were still developing 
their Active Directory implementation. 

On June 23, 2016 12:56:42 PM PDT, Colton Conor  wrote:
>What dns name solvers do you use to hand out to your customers via DHCP
>and
>why? Today we just hand out Google's 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 as a name
>resolvers. I recently learned about OpenDNS's free service for homes
>where
>a home user can monitor and potentially block certain websites, but
>that
>would require the home to signup at open dns, and then enter open DNS
>in
>their router. However if we handed out OpenDNS's IPs instead of
>googles,
>and provided a gateway, then that would remove that step of the client
>having to enter opendns IPs into their router right?
>
>Does OpenDNS have a service for ISP's? That gives us insight as to
>where
>traffic on our network is heading based dns lookups? I know about
>Netflow
>etc, but doing this though DNS seems like a cool option as well. We
>wouldn't want to block anything as an ISP, but it would be useful to
>know
>the top visited site by our customers is facebook.com for example.
>
>If not OpenDNS, then is there some other hosted DNS service for ISP's?
>
>
>
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

[John J Thomas]

I realize that many here hate the Cisco word, but all their radios are DFS 
compliant.

John

-Original Message-
From: Art Stephens [mailto:asteph...@ptera.com]
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 08:29 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of
these frequencies.
Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that
platform.
First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about
40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840
runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area,
Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840.
Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with
it.
Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA.
Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports
5170-5875.

Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more
money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both
wisps and consumers.

-- 
Arthur Stephens
Senior Networking Technician
Ptera Inc.
PO Box 135
24001 E Mission Suite 50
Liberty Lake, WA 99019
509-927-7837
ptera.com
facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera
 -
This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is
intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed.
Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or
opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not
intended to represent those of the company.



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

[John J Thomas]

I realize that many here hate the Cisco word, but all their radios are DFS 
compliant.

John

-Original Message-
From: Art Stephens [mailto:asteph...@ptera.com]
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 08:29 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of
these frequencies.
Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that
platform.
First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about
40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840
runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area,
Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840.
Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with
it.
Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA.
Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports
5170-5875.

Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more
money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both
wisps and consumers.

-- 
Arthur Stephens
Senior Networking Technician
Ptera Inc.
PO Box 135
24001 E Mission Suite 50
Liberty Lake, WA 99019
509-927-7837
ptera.com
facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera
 -
This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is
intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed.
Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or
opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not
intended to represent those of the company.



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

[WISPA] Ubiquiti UniFi AP Pro

[John J Thomas]

Does anyone know where I can get one of these? I'm hearing 6-8 week back order?

Otherwise, what other devices might be competitive?
Needs to be 

802.11 a/b/g/n
Standard 802.11af POE
Indoor model



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti UniFi AP Pro

[John J Thomas]

I'm not familiar with that, is it on their web site?

John


-Original Message-
From: Mike Hammett [mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 11:08 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti UniFi AP Pro

Have you tried the UBNT stock locator?



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

- Original Message -
From: John J Thomas jtho...@quarnet.com
To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 1:13:25 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Ubiquiti UniFi AP Pro

Does anyone know where I can get one of these? I'm hearing 6-8 week back order?

Otherwise, what other devices might be competitive?
Needs to be 

802.11 a/b/g/n
Standard 802.11af POE
Indoor model



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti UniFi AP Pro

[John J Thomas]

Thanks, much appreciated.

John 

-Original Message-
From: Mike Hammett [mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 06:35 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti UniFi AP Pro

Yes. Google for exactly what I said.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

- Original Message -
From: John J Thomas jtho...@quarnet.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 8:36:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti UniFi AP Pro

I'm not familiar with that, is it on their web site?

John


-Original Message-
From: Mike Hammett [mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 11:08 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti UniFi AP Pro

Have you tried the UBNT stock locator?



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

- Original Message -
From: John J Thomas jtho...@quarnet.com
To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 1:13:25 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Ubiquiti UniFi AP Pro

Does anyone know where I can get one of these? I'm hearing 6-8 week back 
order?

Otherwise, what other devices might be competitive?
Needs to be 

802.11 a/b/g/n
Standard 802.11af POE
Indoor model



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Gigabit Router or L3 Switch?

[John J Thomas]

Cisco 3560 series are about $4000...

John


-Original Message-
From: Nick [mailto:lists-wi...@atomsplash.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 2, 2011 11:18 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Gigabit Router or L3 Switch?

They need to run up to 1Gbps. ATT is installing a 1Gbps connection. 
Realistically I don't think they'll use that all of the time, probably 
in the 500-750Mbps range. No clue on average packet size.

On 2/2/2011 10:57 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:

 How much real throughput do they need?  Any idea of the average packet 
 size?

 You could use an ImageStream Rebel router for a WHOLE LOT less than 
 the Cisco:

 http://www.imagestream.com/Rebel.html

 Regards,

 Jeff
 ImageStream Sales Manager
 800-813-5123 x106

 

 *From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
 *On Behalf Of *Nick
 *Sent:* Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:16 PM
 *To:* us...@wug.cc; WISPA General List
 *Subject:* [WISPA] Gigabit Router or L3 Switch?

 I have a customer that needs a router capable of routing up to 1Gbps of
 traffic - ATT Ethernet handoff. Should only really need 1 WAN port and
 1 LAN port. What's everyone else using? They have shunned the idea of a
 RouterMaxx or PowerRouter. They prefer to stick with Cisco, Adtran, or
 Foundry.

 Cisco doesn't seem too cost effective; the only thing I've found that
 will run that much traffic is a 7206 with a G2. Anything newer and we're
 in the $20k-$40k range.

 Should I be looking at Layer 3 switches? They shouldn't need any
 firewall or filtering on this device.


 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 

 No virus found in this message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
 Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3418 - Release Date: 02/02/11




 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/







WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Gigabit Router or L3 Switch?

[John J Thomas]

3560s are layer 3 switches that are current product..

John


-Original Message-
From: Blake Bowers [mailto:bbow...@mozarks.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 3, 2011 10:36 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Gigabit Router or L3 Switch?

Naturally - and I have stacks of 3660's that are barely above scrap 
value.


Don't take your organs to heaven,
heaven knows we need them down here!
Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

- Original Message - 
From: John J Thomas jtho...@quarnet.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 12:34 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Gigabit Router or L3 Switch?


 Cisco 3560 series are about $4000...





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Simultaneous connections

[John J. Thomas]

FWIW, Cisco 871's will route wirespeed at 100 megabits/sec, but can only 
firewall/NAT/VPN at 25 megabits/sec.

John

-Original Message-
From: Al Stewart [mailto:stewa...@westcreston.ca]
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 03:05 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Simultaneous connections

Thanks Tom ...

I know some of the cheaper wireless routers on our system have been 
causing speed problems for various reasons. And I can see the reasons 
for the problems. But for most people, I guess a router is a router, 
and they don't want to spend big bucks.

For myself, I'm looking to replace my own personal D-Link DI-704P 
(wired) with another wired unit. Researching models gives all kinds 
of conflicting info/complaints/recommendations. Someone here 
recommended, so I guess I'll see what I can track down on that.

Al

-- At 05:54 PM 10/16/2009 -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote: ---

Yes they can be the cause for numerous reasons.

1) they can start to go flaky, and when gone flaky they can cause hesitent
throughput, (sorta like when a CPU overheats, or when a bus or cache limit
gets exceeded) that will force TCPIP congestion to slow throughput.  Its not
uncommon to have cases where we replace a router with another of the same
brand/model and the speed testing improves by 4x. BUT when this happens it
is because the product had become defective, not because the unit wasn't
originally capable..

2) a 10mbps port does not guarantee that a route can push 10mbps. 10mbps is
just the speed of the NIC itself. Many cheaper or older generation routers
have very slow processors and can slow down with small packet traffic. Not
just processors but memory and bus design. Also, all firmwares might not be
optimize for higher speeds. For example, for GB you might want large network
buffers, where as routers that were developed at the day of 1mbps max DSL,
may have optimized for the typic speed, and used fewer buffers to conserve
RAM, and use less ram to lower costs.

However, MOST routers of current generation are pretty capable, and usually
do fine up at higher speeds.  Also be cautious of using a VPN router,
because it can take quite a bit of overhead to encrypt or compress the
tunnel, and could get slowed at high speed.  The best thing to do is to
certify the peak speed of any Router that you plan to use regularly. Dont
believe the Spec sheet, believe your own Iperf test results.

The issue is how do you tell if a router is flaking out and how can you test
the router's capabilty remotely if a support call arises?
If you dont have a way to test certify it working to spec, how do you know
it is?

This is why we tend to use more power routers when we can. We like them to
have processor powerful enough to run full speed throughput tests directly
to the router.
In other words, A router can always pass much more traffic speeds through
it, than it can actuallu hald directly to or from it.  Having fast
processors in the routers, creating extra headroom, gets aroud this problem.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message -
From: Al Stewart stewa...@westcreston.ca
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Simultaneous connections


  Thanks ... this helps.
 
  One more question. Do routers being used by the subscribers (wired or
  wireless) ever affect the speed/bandwidth. I don't see how that can
  be as they are designed to pass 10 Meg to the WAN, which is six times
  at least what the
  nominal bandwidth would be. One tech guy is trying to blame routers
  for all problems. But I have yet to see the logic in that. Unless of
  course one is malfunctioning or dying or something. But that can't be
  ALL the routers in the system.
 
  Al
 
  -- At 02:15 PM 10/15/2009 -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote: ---
 
 Everything goes to crap, unless you've put in bandwdith management to
 address those conditions.
 The problem gets worse when  Traffic becomes... Lots of small packets
 and/or
 lots of uploads.
 Obviously Peer-to-Peer can have those characteristics.
 The bigger problem is NOT fairly sharing bandwidith per sub, but instead
 managing based on what percentage of bandwidth is going up versus down.
 This can be a problem when Bandwdith mangement is Full Duplex, and Radios
 are Half Duplex, and its never certain whether end user traffic is gfoing
 to
 be up or down during the congestion time.
 Generally congestion will happen in teh upload direction more, because its
 common practice to assume majority of bandwidth use is in teh download
 direction, so most providers allocate more bandwdith for download.
 Therfore
 when there is an unsuspecting surge in upload bandwdith, the limited
 amount
 of upload capacity gets saturated sooner.
 
 We took a two prong approach to fix.
 
 1) We used Trango 900Mhz internal bandwidth management, to help. MIRs set
 to
 end user sold full speed, and CIR set really low 

Re: [WISPA] Ideas on Police Department Wireless Link from Stationto Cruiser

[John J. Thomas]

If you are working with law enforcement, they generraly need FIPs compliance on 
anything that touches their network.

John
-Original Message-
From: Robert West [mailto:robert.w...@just-micro.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 12:05 PM
To: lakel...@gbcx.net, ''WISPA General List''
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ideas on Police Department Wireless Link from 
Stationto   Cruiser

Yeah, that's the part I was leery of when he asked.  I knew there were some
sort of safeguards that had to be followed and I'm totally green in that
area.  We've done a few medical sites that had to be HIPPA compliant and it
wasn't such a big deal but I hate messing with the cops.  They have other
ways to complain other than not paying an invoice.



-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of lakel...@gbcx.net
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 1:49 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ideas on Police Department Wireless Link from Stationto
Cruiser

Be careful of the new federal encryption requirements for anything hooked up
to the National Crime Computers. 

A lot of states have new rules also when interfacing to the state DMV and
crime networks

Just FYI

-B-
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-Original Message-
From: Jayson Baker jay...@spectrasurf.com
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:37:26 
To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ideas on Police Department Wireless Link from Station
   to Cruiser

We currently do this for a local PD.  They have 13 of those ruggedized Dell
laptops, mounted in all the cars.
We looked at 2.4GHz and 900MHz.  Even though the town is only 5sqmi, we
decided to go with Verizon Aircards.

Worked out well, because the laptops are tied directly into their CAD
system, which is tied into the whole state.
So now they could, theoretically, go anywhere in the state and be dispatched
on a call, run plates/people through NCIC, etc.

I believe that because of that, they actually got the state to pay for a lot
of it.

Sure, we don't make anything on the Verizon service, but we do on the
backend by tying their CAD into the Internet.

Just something to keep in mind, if you have any sort of 3G service in that
area.

Jayson

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Robert West
robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote:

 I got a call Friday afternoon from the police chief of a small little spot
 in the road asking about the possibility of connecting his cruisers to the
 station network via a wireless link.  (He is the Police Chief but I
 suspect he is also the entire police force)  He said that the local
 Wal-Mart
 has agreed to donate to him a few of those little Acer 7 screen laptops,
 which are a big piece of crap from the number of repairs we've had to do
on
 them...  Anyhow, he wants to be able to be in the cruiser and connect to
 the
 network back at the station and use the websites from the Attorney
 General's
 office where he can run plates, drivers license info and also fill out his
 reports.



 Here's the setup..



 This Burg is a bit less than 2 miles long and about one and a half miles
 wide.  The town hall is equivalent to a 4 story building and they also
have
 a water tower that looks to be 100 foot tall.  The terrain is flat as can
 be
 and they have the normal scattering of trees.  The Town Hall and water
 tower
 are the tallest structures by far aside from a large grain elevator right
 outside of town.  Boy wants to connect to his network anywhere in town
from
 his cop-mobile as well as when he is at home, also within the town.



 We've done plenty of private networks but it's all been in the 2.4 and
5ghz
 band.  He was thinking he could just throw up a 2.4ghz link and be good
but
 I told him to hold on, I didn't think he could broadcast the Attorney
 Generals network to every antenna in town, I had to do some research.  So
 this, because of my utterly blatant laziness, is my research. J



 Has anyone been down this path?  What can we do and not do?



 I have a meeting with the guy next Wednesday and want to have some idea of
 what we're up against on this one.  (Hopefully he doesn't recognize me as
 the guy who took him to court over a ticket he wrote for a crooked license
 plate...  I won that one by the way)



 Thanks for any help!



 Robert West

 Just Micro Digital Services Inc.

 740-335-7020









 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/





 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

Re: [WISPA] Support a WISP on ARIN's board- Final Slate of Candidates Announced for ARIN Board of Trustees and Advisory Council

[John J. Thomas]

The theory is that routing slots cost money. If you have a /19 and consume a 
routing slot there is x cost. If you have a /8 and consume a routing slot then 
the cost is nearly the same. Even if that is the case, it still seems the 
pricing should be more linear.

John
-Original Message-
From: Robert West [mailto:robert.w...@just-micro.com]
Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 08:41 AM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Support a WISP on ARIN's board- Final Slate of
Candidates  Announced for ARIN Board of Trustees and Advisory Council

Agreed.  At first I was told it was that the IP's were getting scare but the
IPV6 addresses aren't much cheaper.  Lies, all lies.  



-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:37 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Support a WISP on ARIN's board- Final Slate of Candidates
Announced for ARIN Board of Trustees and Advisory Council


I wanted to point out that we have an allie WISP and friend running for 
ARIN's Advisory board.

 He is... Mark Bayliss, Visual Link Internet
 (also known from Virginia ISP association)

 Please offer your support and vote, if you have an AS and eligible to vote.

 Why is IP space so expensive? Why do small ISPs pay the bulk of the cost,
 and large providers pay next to nothing per IP?
 Because  ARIN's board usually was comprised of large ISPs.

 Lets get the voice of small ISPs to the ARIN board!

 If you agree, spread the word.  Link to Voting listed below...

 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 301-515-7774
 IntAirNet - Fixed Wireless Broadband

 - Original Message - 
 From: ARIN Member Services i...@arin.net
 To: t...@rapiddsl.net
 Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 3:29 PM
 Subject: Final Slate of Candidates Announced for ARIN Board of Trustees 
 and Advisory Council


 Elections for three (3) seats on the ARIN Board of Trustees and five (5) 
 seats
 on the ARIN Advisory Council will be held online 21-31 October. Details 
 of the
 election procedures will be presented at the 21 October Public Policy 
 Meeting
 and will be posted on ARIN's website.

 The final slate of candidates is:

 Board of Trustees:
 * Paul Andersen, EGATE Networks, Inc.
 * Scott Bradner, Harvard University
 * Lee Howard, Time Warner Cable
 * Aaron Hughes, 6connect
 * Frederick Silny, Charlotte Russe Holding, Inc.

 Advisory Council:
 * Mark Bayliss, Visual Link Internet
 * John Brown, Citylink Fiber Holdings
 * Rudolf Daniel, Independent
 * Steve Feldman, CBS Interactive
 * Wes George, Sprint
 * Chris Grundemann, TW Telecom Inc / CO ISOC
 * Stacy Hughes, Guavus, Inc
 * Kevin Hunt, Hunt Brothers of Louisiana, LLC
 * Mark Johnson, MCNC
 * Ed Kern, Cisco
 * Chris Morrow, Google
 * Christopher Savage, Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP
 * Heather Schiller, Verizon
 * Rob Seastrom, Afilias
 * Scott Weeks, Hawaiian Telcom
 * Tom Zeller, Indiana University

 Thomas Leonard and Bill Sandiford did not receive the 172 petition 
 signatures
 from designated member representatives to be included on the final slate 
 of
 candidates for the Advisory Council. Additionally note that on 29 
 September
 Kevin Kargel withdrew his candidacy from the Advisory Council.

 Many of the candidates will address the membership at the 21 October 
 Members
 Meeting in Dearborn. Individuals unable to attend the meeting can watch 
 the
 live webcast to hear the speeches. These candidate speeches will be 
 posted to
 the website within 3 days. Brief biographies and a form to voice support 
 for
 candidates can be found at:

 https://www.arin.net/app/election/

 Designated member representatives (DMR) from ARIN's General Members in 
 good
 standing will be eligible to vote for three (3) candidates in the Board
 election and five (5) candidates in the Advisory Council election. ARIN 
 Member
 Services requires a name and personalized e-mail address be on record for

 the
 DMR; role accounts are not acceptable. As stated in previous 
 announcements,
 the deadline for establishing voter eligibility was 7 October 2009.

 Warm regards,

 John Curran
 President and CEO
 American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: 

[WISPA] Senate Bill

[John J. Thomas]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/28/senate-president-emergency-control-internet/





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Fwd: Fiber cut in SF area

[John J. Thomas]

www.covadwireless.com

They service a large chunk of the SF Bay Area and some of the Los Angeles area.

John 


-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson [mailto:t...@ida.net]
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 05:20 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fwd: Fiber cut in SF area




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mesh just for kicks

[John J. Thomas]

Some MME info

http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/MME_wireless_routing_protocol

John

-Original Message-
From: Scottie Arnett [mailto:sarn...@info-ed.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 09:34 PM
To: e...@wisp-router.com, 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh just for kicks

Too give credit where credit is due...did not a university do this to begin 
with that worked really well...and all other versions are built on it?

Scottie

-- Original Message --
From: e...@wisp-router.com
Reply-To: e...@wisp-router.com, WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Date:  Tue, 17 Feb 2009 16:36:32 +

MikroTik has its MME implementation that is what should be used instead of 
using WDS for a mesh setup. MME is as true mesh as it gets. 

/Eje
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-Original Message-
From: Harold Bledsoe hbled...@deliberant.net

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:52:39 
To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh just for kicks


Well there is also the mesh part too.  Is this what you guys are talking
about when you say MT mesh:  http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Mesh_wds

If so, I would disagree that this is a good mesh implementation.
There are many, many more factors to consider when building an
infrastructure mesh.  The LigoMesh products take into account signal
strength, hops from GW, node load, datarate, etc. to calculate the best
path.  Also, there are dedicated radios for uplink/downlink/service set
to give high performance.

On the other hand, if you don't need a carrier-grade infrastructure
mesh, Wiligear products based on the WBD-500 do support Open-Mesh and
should be available in the very near future on Streakwave's website with
the option to have them preloaded with Open-mesh (board, indoor, and
outdoor selections).

I guess what I'm saying is that not all products are created equal and
there is certainly a place for each one.  Just be sure you know what you
are getting!

-Hal


-Original Message-
From: os10ru...@gmail.com
Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh just for kicks
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:38:04 -0430

Mr. Burgess,

  What frightens me about taking the leap into Mikrotik is it appears  
the web interface is of no use in the advanced configuration and it  
sounds like one must get heavily into the CLI and scripting. I don't  
see an online repository of scripts for programming or even a highly  
detailed help/wiki online. I'm guessing too many people are making too  
much money doing their Mikrotik training to give it away for free. So  
because of the apparently steep learning curve I'm leery to make the  
leap. The more easily configurable (and less powerful) solutions such  
as Ubiquiti look more appealing to me at this point.

  Would you disagree with my perspective? Is making the leap not that  
bad?

Greg
On Feb 17, 2009, at 10:21 AM, Dennis Burgess wrote:

 Ya, don't know why ya don't want a MT solution.  Been there done that
 and it works :)

 * ---
 Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
 WISPA Board Member - wispa.org http://www.wispa.org/
 Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik  WISP Support Services
 WISPA Vendor Member*
 *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
 http://www.linktechs.net/
 */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
 http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp

 The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by  
 the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is  
 intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
 it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged  
 material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of,  
 or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by  
 persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is  
 prohibited, If you
 received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the  
 material from any computer.





 e...@wisp-router.com wrote:
 MT and a consultant ;)

 /me laughing while running for cover

 Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

 -Original Message-
 From: Scott Vander Dussen sc...@velociter.net

 Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:13:03
 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Mesh just for kicks


 Looking to deploy a small mesh network downtown in a small city  
 just for kicks.  Low budget ($4k for ~10 nodes) - just want to get  
 my feet wet and have some fun.

 I'd charge for the service if it was easy enough to do and it  
 worked good enough to justify a cost, otherwise free.  Was hoping  
 there is was a turn-key solution (PLEASE don't suggest Mikrotik - I  
 could ask for a recommendation on how to remove chest hair and  
 someone will mention MT).  Anyhow, turn-key like Meraki advertises  
 would be cool.  How about the Pico2HP - is there a firmware that  
 

Re: [WISPA] Custom Rackmount Enclosures?

[John J. Thomas]

Would it be possible to modify a Mini ITX 1U rack mount enclosure? I think you 
can find them for under $200.

John


-Original Message-
From: Brad Belton [mailto:b...@belwave.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 08:22 AM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Custom Rackmount Enclosures?

I looked into this for a custom 2U enclosure.  Came in around $600-$800 per
cabinet.  Let me know if you find someone that can build custom enclosures
for less.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 10:04 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Custom Rackmount Enclosures?

Anyone know of a metal fab to make some custom 1u enclosures for
Mikrotik Routerboards?
 

Gino A. Villarini 
g...@aeronetpr.com 
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145 

 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mesh just for kicks

[John J. Thomas]

You DO NOT have to use a CLI to do firewalling nowadays. Cisco has the SDM for 
routers, and the ASDM for ASA's.

John

-Original Message-
From: e...@wisp-router.com [mailto:e...@wisp-router.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 07:26 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh just for kicks

Winbox. Then very little need for CLI. There is nothing you can not do through 
winbox that you can not do through CLI. Scripting most people do not use it or 
just use it to execute simple CLI instructions. You have a bunch of script 
samples on wiki.mikrotik.com. 
Like with any advanced networking product there is a little learning curve. 
But reason why most people have problems getting a grip on MikroTik is that 
their network knowledge is limited so they have problem understanding the 
routing concept and understanding how ip works and flows with its source 
ports, destination ports so they have issues creating firewall rules etc. On 
the WISP-Training Mikrotik class (the training material Butch and me created) 
the primary reason it was created was to teach how routing, sub netting and ip 
flows worked and of course from a view point in how to configure this with 
MikroTik. It's a whole lot easier to get running then say a Cisco router where 
everything have to be CLI and firewalling rule creation imo is very cryptic 
and not very straight forward. 

/Eje Gustafsson
CTO
WISP-Router, Inc
Bringing MikroTik to the masses since 2002. 
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-Original Message-
From: os10ru...@gmail.com

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:38:04 
To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh just for kicks


Mr. Burgess,

   What frightens me about taking the leap into Mikrotik is it appears  
the web interface is of no use in the advanced configuration and it  
sounds like one must get heavily into the CLI and scripting. I don't  
see an online repository of scripts for programming or even a highly  
detailed help/wiki online. I'm guessing too many people are making too  
much money doing their Mikrotik training to give it away for free. So  
because of the apparently steep learning curve I'm leery to make the  
leap. The more easily configurable (and less powerful) solutions such  
as Ubiquiti look more appealing to me at this point.

   Would you disagree with my perspective? Is making the leap not that  
bad?

Greg
On Feb 17, 2009, at 10:21 AM, Dennis Burgess wrote:

 Ya, don't know why ya don't want a MT solution.  Been there done that
 and it works :)

 * ---
 Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
 WISPA Board Member - wispa.org http://www.wispa.org/
 Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik  WISP Support Services
 WISPA Vendor Member*
 *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
 http://www.linktechs.net/
 */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
 http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp

 The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by  
 the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is  
 intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
 it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged  
 material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of,  
 or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by  
 persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is  
 prohibited, If you
 received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the  
 material from any computer.





 e...@wisp-router.com wrote:
 MT and a consultant ;)

 /me laughing while running for cover

 Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

 -Original Message-
 From: Scott Vander Dussen sc...@velociter.net

 Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:13:03
 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Mesh just for kicks


 Looking to deploy a small mesh network downtown in a small city  
 just for kicks.  Low budget ($4k for ~10 nodes) - just want to get  
 my feet wet and have some fun.

 I'd charge for the service if it was easy enough to do and it  
 worked good enough to justify a cost, otherwise free.  Was hoping  
 there is was a turn-key solution (PLEASE don't suggest Mikrotik - I  
 could ask for a recommendation on how to remove chest hair and  
 someone will mention MT).  Anyhow, turn-key like Meraki advertises  
 would be cool.  How about the Pico2HP - is there a firmware that  
 works on those that could mesh?  Very new to mesh - thanks in  
 advance.

 `S

 PS- Please don't hijack the thread defending how great MT is and  
 how it can save the world etc.. not bashing, just want plug+play  
 which != MT.  (:


 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 

Re: [WISPA] Berber carpet

[John J. Thomas]

Is there any reason you don't just cut an X in the carpter and then trim it?

John

-Original Message-
From: John Scrivner [mailto:j...@scrivner.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2009 08:18 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Berber carpet

You need to use a sharp razor knife to cut a slit about 3 inches long along
the grain of the carpet. Then hold the carpet to the side as you drill.
Scriv


On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 10:09 AM, RickG rgunder...@gmail.com wrote:

 How do you guys drill holes through berber carpet withour pulling the
 threads?
 I have the cutting tool but thread still grab onto the drill bit.
 I've thought about finding a metal tube to put the drill into so it
 doesnt catch the carpet.
 Thoughts?
 -RickG



 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/

 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] FCC changes

[John J. Thomas]

Let's talk about this for a minute.

When I signed up for my $24.95 DSL, ATT *gave* me a free DSL modem- if the 
rules change, that won't be able to happen anymore.

If you, as a WISP say here are your options

1. Pay $299 install, and the client can do whatever they want
2. Pay $49 install and a *lease* fee of $22 per month, and the WISP owns the 
equipment

How will you lose? 
  
John Thomas


-Original Message-
From: Scottie Arnett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2008 02:58 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC changes

I agree Travis. This will hurt. The FCC seems to be overstepping their 
boundaries alot the last few months on many issues, and this is another area I 
think they should stay out of. Just my 2 cents.

Scottie

-- Original Message --
From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Date:  Sat, 31 May 2008 13:40:04 -0600



Dial-Up Internet service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $9.99/mth.
Check out www.info-ed.com for information.



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] IPv6 and Us

[John J. Thomas]

I hope they don't charge more for IPv6. Currently ARIN is offering discounts 
for those that want to deploy IPv6, and they are considering making IPv4 cost 
more as time goes on in order to push IPv6 adoption.

John


-Original Message-
From: Anthony R. Mattke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 4, 2008 06:55 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPv6 and Us

As far as vendors go, I've seen the same thing on our end, I'm pretty 
sure none of our CPE supports it as of yet, the only thing that does is 
our routers. I would like to say that Imagestream has been great as far 
as getting us updated with IPv6 tools,  their engineers are working on 
quite a few exciting things that I think are going to help the migration 
of IPv6 into our network.

We just got our allocation last Friday, I think out of all of our 
upstreams, only 2 do IPv6 on their own backbone. And honestly I'm a bit 
worried to contact one of them..  they're going to want to charge us for it.

-Tony

Bryan Scott wrote:
 Anthony R. Mattke wrote:
 Someone posted some questions about a year ago about IPv6 and most of us 
 looked at it and said yeah, some day.. but for a lot of us IPv6 is our 
 next step.

   What about IPv6-IPv6 gateways/6to4 tunnels? Anyone configure one on 
 their network yet?
 
 I've done this at home with one of my Linux boxes and it works great on 
 Linux and OS X.  That's as far as I got.
 
 There are a lot of questions for anything thinking about IPv6 
 integration / migration, and I'd like to discuss some of the options as 
 far as moving forward with IPv6 deployment with anyone that is interested.
 
 We went to an ARIN IPv6 meeting, and even got our initial IPv6 
 allocation.  The biggest problem pointed out by the DOD presenter was 
 that nobody's eating their own dog food.  All the vendors are making 
 IPv6 compliant gear, but it doesn't cooperate well (he cited various 
 issues in their testing).
 
 That leads to the second problem, which is since nothing works, nobody 
 deploys.  Without anybody deploying, nothing gets tested so that it 
 works.  A big chicken-and-egg problem...
 
 After getting our deployment, I asked our (big name) upstream providers 
 about setting up concurrent IPv6 peering or tunneling, whichever would 
 work.  They were reluctant and said they weren't really ready or 
 couldn't do it.
 
 -- Bryan
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
  
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 

Anthony R. Mattke
Senior Network Engineer
CyberLink International
888.293.3693 x4353
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Fiber

[John J. Thomas]

If the drop is 550', you can use Multi mode and the termination is considerably 
cheaper.

As for individual strands, there is probably a balance where it makes sense to 
not necessarily drop 128 strands, but do something more than 6 strands. 


John


-Original Message-
From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 04:04 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fiber

Thanks for offering to help,


Here's what I have.
My noc is across a creek from a water tank that I have a dozen ap's on. 
So I have to do aerial to get there. I want to use an aerial cable that 
has a lot of fibers in it. So I can put each radio on it's own fiber and 
not have a switch at the tank.
I also want to extend the rest of the unused fibers out to do a fiber to 
the premises roll out.

What I'm not sure is what type or size of fiber to pull, considering I 
want to break it out and go down the street.
I'm assuming single mode and I'm thinking this drop is short, 550', I 
can use like 128 strands.

I am assuming going up the street to the homes, It would be a PON network.

So I'm not sure of the fiber, or the network equipment behind it.

George


Scott Reed wrote:
 I may not get you all the answers, but here are some questions you need 
 to answer to get answers:
 How far do you want to go?
 What kind of data and data rates are you looking for?
 What equipment is at the ends?
 Hanging from poles, buried, etc.?
 
 
 George Rogato wrote:
 Anyone do fiber?
 I'm wondering where I should be looking for good pricing on some 
 aerial fiber.
 I don't know very much about fiber at all, so I also need some advice 
 on what fiber I should be using as well as what connectors.

 Anyone have any experience?

 Thanks
 

-- 
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Copper Plant

[John J. Thomas]

These guys have the right idea...

http://www.fiberinternetcenter.com/

John


-Original Message-
From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 12:39 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper Plant

And this is why I planning a fiber roll out in my town.

I can see the spectrum - bandwidth limitations of a pure wireless play 
and would like to be able to run with the big dogs When they start 
cranking up their stuff.

George

Mike Hammett wrote:
 BINGO!
 
 
 -
 Mike Hammett
 Intelligent Computing Solutions
 http://www.ics-il.com
 
 
 - Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 1:04 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper Plant
 
 
 Isn't the reason they are replacing some of their copper with fiber is 
 because they then do not have to allow competition to ride their wires?
 Old wires old rules, new fiber new rules?

 George

 Peter R. wrote:
 The ATT (originally SBC) VDSL plan requires copper to the home. 
 Fiber to the neighborhood.

 In VZ region, they are pulling out copper as fast as they can  
 replacing it with fiber. (FiOS is FTTH not FTTN).
 VZ even clips the copper when they install your FiOS.
 And what VZ isn't replacing, thieves are stealing, since copper is 
 easy to sell.

 VZ's union is even claiming that VZ is not maintaining the copper 
 plant in some areas.

 If you watch the FCC network notifications, there is more copper 
 replacement being done this year then ever before.

 - Peter

 Steve Stroh wrote:

 Clint:

 No, not really, as ATT is betting on copper only in the last few 
 hundred
 feet to the premises. While they're not going to do 
 fiber-to-the-premises,
 they will be doing a fiber infrastructure.


 Thanks,

 Steve


 On 6/15/07, Clint Ricker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 ATT is betting on copper for the next 5-10 years for the next 5-10 
 years.
 I think that, alone, about disbunks this article.

 -Clint





 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

[John J. Thomas]

Sprint EVDO is $59-79 per month, and there are hardware routers that accept the 
card.

John

-Original Message-
From: Pete Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 05:09 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

The $10/mo for web access with Sprint ONLY applies to the use on the 
phone. When you plug in the data cable, and use it as a modem, its like 
$0.30/kb. Learning that lesson cost me.
The unlimited phone-as-a-modem or data card rate is around $39/mo.

Does anyone know if there are drivers/capabilities to link a data card 
to a Mikrotik or StarOS box? I guess that there are other Linux drivers 
out there, so my thinking may work.
I have considered for some time the possibilities of making a box to 
mount in my car (car-puter) with a Sprint (or Cingular, or Verizon, or 
whoever) cellular type data connection, with a WIFI client as the 
primary (or secondary) mode of connection. With DDNS, access to the dash 
mounted camera, GPS stream, etc should be easy enough, making it a 
roll-your-own LowJack type system. Also, in the car, an ethernet jack to 
plug a laptop into could be nice, as well as opening the possibilities 
to put in an ATA to make VOIP calls, as well as adding a WIFI AP. $39/mo 
for unlimited data connectivity, especially if it gives the 
speed/latency required to do VOIP, seems like a bargain compared to 
$129/mo for 2000 minutes. I guess a Windows-based system could do all of 
those things, but the RAM/processor/etc/boot time/bluescreens associated 
with Windoze don't seem to make it conducive to this type of project, IMO.

The car-puter installation plan things that I have read about seem to 
focus on GPS and MP3 playing. Since my wreck 6 yrs ago, where I couldn't 
prove to the insurance company (5 eyewitnesses from every direction from 
the intersection and a police report weren't good enough) that I had the 
green light. I have been thinking about a car-mounted DVR with cameras 
in the grill, the dash, and in the back to offer video defense in a car 
accident claim. Showing the judge, the insurance agent, or whoever a DVD 
of the video surveillance of the accident could save a lot of time and 
hassle.

What I wish someone would sell for a car (these things probably all 
exist in one form or another with various systems) is a computer that 
will act as a:
DVR security cam recorder (cam pointed at the driver seat to 
prosecute the car thief, + cams on bumpers to witness accidents)
Data port (ethernet + WIFI AP)
Web server (with DDNS support to access the stored data, even when 
the car is away from the house, like at an impound yard or after being 
stolen)
MP3 player
Realtime ODBII scanning/recording/diagnostics of the car.
VOIP system.
GPS stream recording. (to show he teenage driver when/how fast she 
was really driving)

I would think that these things could all be incorporated for under $2k, 
mounted in the trunk, and it would be something that would sell like 
crazy for $3k installed.

I guess what I would like is a retail version of this with more features:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/how20/d04305f2dbbf1110vgnvcm104eecbccdrcrd.html

pd


Rich Comroe wrote:
 What a rip!  Sprint told me it's only $300-400 to get out of a Sprint 
 contract.  What's it cost to early terminate a Cingular contract?  Why 
 doesn't he just terminate?  Getting a $1200 monthly bill is 
 ridiculous! UNLIMITED data to a Sprint windows phone is only about 
 $10/month, and there's no way to limit it to not operate tethered to a 
 computer (other than unreasonably large download usage).  And it's 
 EVDO, so it blows away that measley 125 - 175 kbit.  I really think 
 those PCMCIA cards are a rip-off for service cost compared to just 
 getting unlimited data service to your cellphone.  I love ppc6700 
 windows phones ... a lot lighter and smaller than a laptop yet nearly 
 as capable.

 Rich

 - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 8:08 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular


 oh, I'm most certainly under $1200, even for a whole year.  :-p

 Anyone have experience getting out of a bad Cingular deal?


 -
 Mike Hammett
 Intelligent Computing Solutions
 http://www.ics-il.com


 - Original Message - From: Scott Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 7:48 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular


 Even if he can't get out of the Cingular contract, I would think 
 paying you your normal rates would cost less than $1200 to 
 Cingular.  Suggest that your unlimited service is still less 
 expensive than overages.

 Mike Hammett wrote:
 I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  
 He's got money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something 
 for nothing.  He has Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit 
 out of 

Re: [WISPA] For George - just because you were thinking of me.

[John J. Thomas]

I wonder if they know what the word multicast measn...


John

-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 08:19 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] For George - just because you were thinking of me.

Even worse than the Friday night phenomenon is say Saturdays in the 
fall.  Layne Sisk had some pretty nasty things to say about the IPTV 
solution used in Utah on football saturdays and how the usage would 
honestly bring the fiber ring to it knees.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

Dawn DiPietro wrote:
 All,

 Below is Ken's latest Blog post, still a work in  progress, since 
 George brought it up he felt it was appropriate.

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro

 According to the A.C. Nielsen Co., the average American watches more than
 4 hours of TV each day.
 http://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tvhealth.html

 Now, I would be the first to admit that there is an unknown percentage of
 time that the TV is on but not being watched in any given family but even
 if we assume that percentage is close to 50% (which I would guess is 
 high)
 we can see that from the estimated five minutes per day the average
 American spent watching internet video (according to the comScore study)
 we could very well see a jump of some nearly 50 times that amount once a
 full palette of subject matter is presented on the Internet for 
 viewing on
 demand.
 http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=1264

 And which of society's groups of will be eager to take advantage of free
 Video On Demand? Why the people who can't afford to pay for these high
 dollar services or would prefer not to.

 The next question is, what kind of bandwidth will it take to deliver VoD
 per user? Let me qualify this question by laying some of the assumptions
 that will need to be addressed in this answer.

 First off, on the average Friday night, at 6:00PM, more than 50% of
 American households have more than one TV set on (read as more than one
 continuous video stream playing) and I would suggest this trend will
 continue, if not increase as the net-centric services improve.

 Secondly, if we are talking about IPTV bandwidth needs, we need to
 forecast that a 1.25Mbps sustained stream is necessary for one stream. If
 we move into the realm of high definition we are now looking at a rate of
 14Mbps (uncompressed) with perhaps a chance of delivering reasonable
 quality using a 4Mbps sustained stream - per video is use. That does not
 take into account any bandwidth for telephone or Internet access, should
 these services be required.

 What we can see is that any network that is only capable of delivering 
 sub
 1Mbps speeds (as measured in real throughput) is now obsolete - we simply
 refuse to admit it yet.

 Of course, we can still continue to bury our heads in the sand and wait
 for the inevitable crisis.




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] ot, linux for home users

[John J. Thomas]

Here are some ideas...

http://www.codeweavers.com/products/differences/

John 


-Original Message-
From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 9, 2007 10:47 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] ot, linux for home users

Hi All,

With all the uproar I'm reading about the computing disaster known as Vista 
I wonder about setting up Linux machines for folks.  Especially those that 
just want to do email and surf the net.

I thought I'd set something up here and let the kids use it.  I'm NO linix 
guy so I need something with a gui and works as closely to xp as I can.  A 
company that'll sell tech support would be a nice addition too.

Would putting Linux on mid range pc's for our average user be a disaster 
from a tech support standpoint?  Or is there a version that'll run windows 
programs and has the look and feel of xp?

thanks,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] External battery on UPS

[John J. Thomas]

inline...

-Original Message-
From: Scott Reed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 2, 2007 04:22 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] External battery on UPS

The charger is designed for the size and number of batteries in the 
original configuration.  Changing the quantity and/or type of battery 
risks damaging either the charger or the batteries.

This is partly true. Some of the larger APC UPSes can have additional batteries 
added on, but there are limits to the number of additional battery packs you 
can add.


Also, runtime is determined by the batteries, so changing them changes 
the runtime.

paul hendry wrote:
 Is anyone using external batteries on the larger APC UPS's? I've got an 
 old Smart-UPS 3000 RM that has 8 x 12v batteries in it. The thing is 
 they are wired in a bit of a strange config. It looks to me like they 
 are split into 4 sets of 2 batteries running in series then 2 of those 
 sets are cabled to the same connector inside the UPS and so there are 2 
 connectors with 4 batteries hanging of each.

 Is there any reason I can't run 2 x 2 (in series) 12v 100ah batteries 
 instead of the original 8? I don't seem to be able to and don't really 
 want to get another 4 batteries just to discover I can do it with 4.

 Cheers,

 P.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
 Behalf Of Mark Nash - Lists
 Sent: 16 November 2006 16:45
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] External battery on UPS

 I replaced the two internal batteries last night with two external, $100
 batteries, and put a load on the UPS that matched the highest load I 
 have
 out in the field (80w).  It took 2 Tranzeo APs, an Xpeed SDSL modem, and 
 a
 19 TV on the QVC to load it up properly.  Now instead of 1 hour I get 
 13
 hours.  Bigger, better batteries should net me more time than this.  My 
 goal
 is bang for buck at this stage in my business...more run time for a 
 sensible
 price.

 One cool thing about this setup is that I can rig it up to be able to 
 simply
 take new batteries out to a site when they are getting low, instead of 
 the
 generator.  I can keep some spare batteries charged up and ready to go.
 It's a whole lot cheaper and easier than purchasing multiple QUALITY 
 1000w
 generators and putting large custom tanks on them.  That is if your UPS 
 is
 not on the top of a water tower or something. ;)

 Mark Nash
 Network Engineer
 UnwiredOnline.Net
 350 Holly Street
 Junction City, OR 97448
 http://www.uwol.net
 541-998-
 541-998-5599 fax

 - Original Message - 
 From: Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 6:41 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] External battery on UPS


   
 I'm pasting Gino's link to the right thread.
 Then I can search me email in a year and find the correct thread

 Connectors:

 http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=263-110

 Batteries:

 http://www.donrowe.com/batteries/8a31dt.html



 Brian Rohrbacher wrote:

 
 Can we get some links to these batteries that work well?
 Gino,
 Got a link to the DC block connectors you were talking about?

 Brian


 Travis Johnson wrote:

   
 Hi,

 We run two 4 gauge power wires out the front of the case, connect 
 
 the
   
 positive to a 60A fuse, and then to the batteries.

 We are using AGM type (same thing used in UPS systems) big 
 
 batteries
   
 (a little bigger than a car battery, but each battery is 110 
 
 pounds).
   
 We wire them in series (to get 24VDC).

 This setup has only been installed for 12-18 months at various
 locations, so I don't have an estimate on battery life.

 Travis
 Microserv

 Brian Rohrbacher wrote:

 
 You got any pics of this or similar Travisanyone?

 Travis,
 What APC do you use and what batteries are added?  What do you 
   
 draw
   
 and what is th run time?  Do you know how many times the one with
 the most cycles has been drawn down?  How long do the batteries 
   
 last?
   
 Brian

 Travis Johnson wrote:

   
 You can't use just 1 battery. The APC units want to see 24vdc, so
 you need two batteries running in series.

 It works perfectly, as I have 20+ remote locations running off 
 
 two
   
 gel type batteries. Make sure you install some type of a fuse on
 the positive side of the connection.

 Travis
 Microserv

 Mark Nash - Lists wrote:

 
 I believe I remember some discussion on this list on connecting 
   
 an
   
 external battery to an APC UPS.  I'm in the middle of doing it
 right now and am having problems.  The UPS just beep 
   
 continuously
   
 with the 'bad battery' light on.  I'm using a Lifeline deep 
   
 cycle
   
 battery.  Any ideas?

 Mark Nash
 Network Engineer
 UnwiredOnline.Net
 350 Holly Street
 Junction City, OR 97448
 http://www.uwol.net
 541-998-
 541-998-5599 fax


  

Vonage Was Re: [WISPA] CALEA opinion... it's nice to know

[John J. Thomas]

Gee, has this ever happened to someone on a cell phone?


-Original Message-
From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 2, 2007 10:03 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA opinion... it's nice to know

Not to change the subject, but

  on that page, I fund this a lot more disturbing..

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/03/vonage_fire.html

wispa wrote:
 That at least SOME people agree with me.
 
 http://blogs.globalcrossing.com/regulatory?from=50
 
 The second entry on that page is very interesting.
 
 While this entry is a bit out of date, he makes a very interesting point... 
 That the feds are trying to figure out how to mandate the costs of whatever 
 they want on industry...  Very much akin to requiring every home to be built 
 with peepholes, and platforms at our windows, so they look in on us without 
 difficulty.  Maybe even requiring remote control drapes? 
 
 Yeah, yeah, I know, you have to be a political radical to NOT want that 
 built 
 into all our homes... but, he has a point. 
 
 
 
 Mark Koskenmaki   Neofast, Inc
 Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains
 541-969-8200
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] School wants authentication

[John J. Thomas]

-Original Message-
From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 2, 2007 02:19 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] School wants authentication

I have a customer who is a high school. They have fiber run to switches 
in 10 buildings. All of those buildings are connected through one giant 
private class B via a DHCP server. We serve wireless to 100% of the
campus, indoors and out, over this same network with several bridged APs
(all certified and not exceeding any power rules - I promise).

 Please tell me you are routing between the wired and wireless segments.


They
would like authentication of users. I tried setting WPA2 with Radius
Auth and created a mess. Every time the AP signal would hand off from
one AP to another (which happens every couple of minutes or more often) 
the system would force re-authentication. It is a bit of a mess.
Configuration of Windows XP for Radius Auth on WPA2 reminds me of the
bad old days of having to tweak Trumpet Winsock or dealing with Windows 
Dial-up Adapter version 1.0.

We had another issue with the APs just constantly forcing
re-authentication via Radius. We have opted for WPA2 Passphrase to
deliver AES encryption for now. This still leaves us with the
authentication issue. They currently have a DHCP server with zero
logging of users. People just connect and get an IP. It is a mess. I
want to propose a better solution.

I would like to see an authentication solution via a hotspot portal or
equivalent which would force credentials be delivered by a user before
any user has access to anything via wired or wireless network. Does
anyone know a good way to do this? I have many ideas but I have never
really done this and I would like to hear what others would propose to
see if my ideas mesh or not. It is also good to see how others handle
this type of situation. I am leaning to a Mikrotik hotspot gateway which
I think will do it all. What say the rest of you?
Scriv


 If they have Windows Server 2003, and the AP's support it, MS CHAP with PEAP 
 works well for secure access. Since  generally deploy Cisco Airespace, we 
 can use the built in hotspot functionality for guest and other access.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] External battery on UPS

[John J. Thomas]

Yes, especially if it would have multiple power taps. We are working on some 
stuff that would might need 12, 24 and 48 volts DC.

John


-Original Message-
From: Russ Kreigh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2007 10:18 AM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: RE: [WISPA] External battery on UPS


Yeah, it's completely possible, and will work well, at least once, until
the batteries are gone and need to be recharged.

The issue is the duty-cycle of the charger, your going from a 14ah to 100ah
charge load, the charger has to run 7-times as long to fully charge the
batteries, this may work fine with some higher end UPS, and some it might
burn up the charger.

Another thing to make note of, is that most UPS systems run an internal 24V
system, and not a 12V system, so be SURE which one you're dealing with
before you start any modifications.

We're in process of developing our own remote-site power solution.
Everything we've found is either too big physically, requiring expensive
outdoor enclosures, or doesn't have the run-time we desire, or is too
expensive.

I think we've got the basic design down, we're adding things like a local
power input option, so that in a long extended outage we can drop the
generator off to charge the batteries and run the system, and when the
utility power is restored, it will switch back automatically.

We're also looking into a direct 12v input from a vehicle cigarette lighter
output, or additional external batteries.

Would anyone have any interest in this when we get it complete?

Thanks,

Russ Kreigh
Network Engineer
OnlyInternet.Net
Supernova Technologies



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of paul hendry
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 12:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; wireless@wispa.org
Subject: RE: [WISPA] External battery on UPS

Scott,

Surely it should be possible to replace 2 12v 7ah batteries run in 
parallel (not series) with 1 12v 100ah battery as the voltage isn't 
changing? With regards runtime I can just increase the external battery 
count.

Mac, don't worry I have no intention of putting my tongue on these 
things to see if they charged ;)

Cheers,

P.

-Original Message-
From: Scott Reed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 02 March 2007 12:22
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] External battery on UPS

The charger is designed for the size and number of batteries in the 
original configuration.  Changing the quantity and/or type of battery 
risks damaging either the charger or the batteries.

Also, runtime is determined by the batteries, so changing them changes 
the runtime.

paul hendry wrote:
 Is anyone using external batteries on the larger APC UPS's? I've got 
an 
 old Smart-UPS 3000 RM that has 8 x 12v batteries in it. The thing is 
 they are wired in a bit of a strange config. It looks to me like they 
 are split into 4 sets of 2 batteries running in series then 2 of those 

 sets are cabled to the same connector inside the UPS and so there are 
2 
 connectors with 4 batteries hanging of each.

 Is there any reason I can't run 2 x 2 (in series) 12v 100ah batteries 
 instead of the original 8? I don't seem to be able to and don't really 

 want to get another 4 batteries just to discover I can do it with 4.

 Cheers,

 P.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
On 
 Behalf Of Mark Nash - Lists
 Sent: 16 November 2006 16:45
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] External battery on UPS

 I replaced the two internal batteries last night with two external, 
$100
 batteries, and put a load on the UPS that matched the highest load I 
 have
 out in the field (80w).  It took 2 Tranzeo APs, an Xpeed SDSL modem, 
and 
 a
 19 TV on the QVC to load it up properly.  Now instead of 1 hour I get 

 13
 hours.  Bigger, better batteries should net me more time than this.  
My 
 goal
 is bang for buck at this stage in my business...more run time for a 
 sensible
 price.

 One cool thing about this setup is that I can rig it up to be able to 
 simply
 take new batteries out to a site when they are getting low, instead of 

 the
 generator.  I can keep some spare batteries charged up and ready to 
go.
 It's a whole lot cheaper and easier than purchasing multiple QUALITY 
 1000w
 generators and putting large custom tanks on them.  That is if your 
UPS 
 is
 not on the top of a water tower or something. ;)

 Mark Nash
 Network Engineer
 UnwiredOnline.Net
 350 Holly Street
 Junction City, OR 97448
 http://www.uwol.net
 541-998-
 541-998-5599 fax

 - Original Message - 
 From: Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 6:41 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] External battery on UPS


   
 I'm pasting Gino's link to the right thread.
 Then I can search me email in a year and find the correct thread

 Connectors:

 

Re: Vonage Was Re: [WISPA] CALEA opinion... it's nice to know

[John J. Thomas]

My point was that they are slamming VOIP, when the cell phone companies stuff 
doesn't work any better. And, cell phone users have been paying a lot of money 
for upgrade to the cell phone networks that haven't even happened yet.

John




-Original Message-
From: wispa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2007 11:32 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: Vonage  WasRe:  [WISPA] CALEA opinion... it's nice to know

On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 19:01:16 +, John J. Thomas wrote
 Gee, has this ever happened to someone on a cell phone?


I have dialed 911 and had the call dropped.

I guess I should sue the cell phone company and lobby Congress to ensure 911
calls cannot be dropped.

Or maybe that's patently absurd.



Mark Koskenmaki   Neofast, Inc
Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains
541-969-8200

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Some opinions

[John J. Thomas]

Carlos, if you put Cisco AP1242's in Nema boxes, you can alternate 2.4 and 5.8 
GHz, thus using only 5 radios.

John

-Original Message-
From: Carlos A. Garcia G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2007 11:40 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Some opinions

Hi i have 2 offices that i have to connect to do this i nedd to use the 
3 points between them

Office1-- P1--P2--P3--Office2

do any of you know what equipments can connect without using too many 
products for example to do that with cisco 1300 wireless
bridges i need to use 8 radios and i want to use 5

Office-- -P1--P2--P3- --Office2
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Some opinions

[John J. Thomas]

1400's are way too expensive to even consider for this.

John

-Original Message-
From: Carlos A. Garcia G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2007 05:23 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Some opinions

do u think that this can be done with cisco 1400 wireless bridge someone 
has used this one?
Butch Evans escribió:
 On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, Carlos A. Garcia G wrote:

 jejeje only need 64k link so the bandwidth will not be the problem

 In that case, I'd just use a simple WDS setup.  It's the 
 easiest/cheapest thing to do.  Just be sure that the APs are secured 
 (to prevent unauthorized access to the network from outside).


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations

[John J. Thomas]

Nope, SBC/ATT uses them in a big way.

John


-Original Message-
From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 09:54 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations

John, you must be in Qwest territory.
We see the 2 wire essid's all over the place, they're replacing the
older actiontec essid's.

George


John J. Thomas wrote:
 I have one in front of me, the FCC ID is PGR2W2700RD.

From the 2Wire website

 Eliminate Coldspots with HyperG Technology
 2Wire?s HyperG? high-powered wireless technology virtually eliminates 
 wireless ?coldspots? in the home. HomePortal residential gateways provide up 
 to seven times the true power of traditional access points and increase 
 wireless bandwidth by using high power 400mW transmitters*. Most wireless 
 access points provide less than 100mW

 *configurable power setting to comply with country specific power 
 requirements

 John

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????

[John J. Thomas]

Cisco AP 1242 Radios have 5.4 GHz as an option in the current flash.

John


-Original Message-
From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 04:08 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?

Travis,
Are saying you are using 5.4 GHz radios in the US?
Scriv


Travis Johnson wrote:

 Hi,

 You make good points... however, the better question is how much money 
 did Z-Tel take out of the business during this time? I would bet the 
 owners and investors made BIG money during this time... so, so what if 
 they are out of business now? If they made millions during that time, 
 then it worked out for them.

 Same for DSL. I know there are companies that are going or gone now, 
 but that made millions in profits during the past 5 years.

 Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say 
 someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with 
 internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for 
 less than $300...

 Travis


 Peter R. wrote:

 Many of you probably don't follow the FCC much, so let me tell you 
 about the stroke of a pen:

 UNE-P which was the magic bullet for CLECs. No facilities needed. 
 Rock bottom pricing on voice lines. Market and sell. Z-Tel and a few 
 others had over 500k lines. Unfortunately, they didn't listen when 
 they were told it would be a stop gap to facilities. In other words, 
 sell UNE-P regionally and convert to facilities. No one listened. 
 Bang! UNE-P ruled no more. One year to move to facilities. Z-Tel just 
 filed BK, following many others that area shadow of their UNE-P selves.

 Another example: DSL. One day it is tariffed. Bang! No tariff. Go 
 nego with the ILEC.

 So please heed the warning about 5.4. It won't take much prodding 
 from DoD to wipe oout your business model.

 This is NOT a threat, folks.  This is how telecom regulations works 
 in the US.

 So skip the forms - 445 and 477. Keep using the unlincesed gear. Next 
 year you can all be pirates. That's okay, because you can celebrate 
 *Gasparilla* Pirate Fest in Tampa after that.

 Plus you say all this stuff on a PUBLIC, archived email list. DUH!

 Regards,

 Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc.


 Patrick Leary wrote:

 Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry?
 Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to
 us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been
 reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious?
 Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I
 don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be
 legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range
 from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 --
 that's cheap.
 My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a
 special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls.

 Patrick Leary
 AVP WISP Markets
 Alvarion, Inc.
 o: 650.314.2628
 c: 760.580.0080
 Vonage: 650.641.1243
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations

[John J. Thomas]

I have one in front of me, the FCC ID is PGR2W2700RD.

From the 2Wire website

Eliminate Coldspots with HyperG Technology
2Wire?s HyperG? high-powered wireless technology virtually eliminates wireless 
?coldspots? in the home. HomePortal residential gateways provide up to seven 
times the true power of traditional access points and increase wireless 
bandwidth by using high power 400mW transmitters*. Most wireless access points 
provide less than 100mW

*configurable power setting to comply with country specific power requirements

John


-Original Message-
From: Matt Larsen - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 01:05 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations

Hm..

My understanding is that 400mw radios are generally not FCC
compliant.If that is the case, then there are a lot of telcos that
have been selling non-compliant equipment in the form of those DSL
modems that they sell to their customers.

Just a thought.

Matt Larsen
vistabeam.com


John J. Thomas wrote:
 The Telcos all over are deploying 400 mW units-anything that says 2WIRE is 
 400 mW.

 John


 -Original Message-
 From: Lonnie Nunweiler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 09:12 PM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations

 Precisely why X2 cloaking is so important.  It doubles the number of
 channels and X4 gives 11 of them back to us.  X4 gives about 7 mbps
 with non compressible data and over 12 mbps with compressible data.
 Better than a standard B model with perfect conditions.

 The other thing to keep in mind is that all of those channel 6 units
 attached to ADSL lines are typically unused or lightly used.  They
 connect with an ADSL line and thus cannot even begin to consume the
 total air time.

 The Telco here is distributing units with 400 mW radaios whether the
 client even wants wireless in their home.  It does not even phase a
 cloaked connection so we are OK with it.

 Lonnie

 On 2/15/07, Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 There USED to be three non overlapping channels.  Now channel 6 overlaps
 with every third house in many markets :-).
 Marlon

 - Original Message -
 From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:10 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations



 Standard Wifi has 3 channels that do not overlap.  X4 cloaking has 6
 channels that do not overlap and X4 cloaking has 11 channels that do
 not overlap.

 We use 4 WLM-54G radios in a WAR4 and have seen no great issues unless
 two active radios are on the same channel.  I am not sure about 6 but
 I know for sure that 4 works fine.  Incidentally the SR9 has almost NO
 leakage.  Even with the cards side by side they will not link up.  In
 order to get anything from them you need a pigtail and an antenna.

 Lonnie

 On 2/15/07, Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I'd recommend against that idea Matt.  ALL devices leak some energy.  And
 the amount of interference you'll create for yourself at inches vs. feet
 is
 amazing.  If you can keep things 3 feet apart there is much less energy,
 small small fractions in fact.

 Alvarion with their FHSS gear can get away with such things because they
 can
 always stay enough hopping channels away from near by radios.  FHSS has
 72
 (or is it only 70?) channels to choose from.  WiFi has basically 2 these
 days.

 Where this one gets hard to explain is that people build such critters,
 test
 them in the lap and then say that they work.  Life will change
 dramatically
 however, once installed into a working system AND with the addition of
 real
 customers with real traffic.

 laters,
 marlon

 - Original Message -
 From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 11:24 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations



 I thought you were already working with Deliberant on just such an
 animal.
 Where are you guys with that? I know they have a dual radio unit capable
 of
 5 GHz and 2.4 GHz in the same box.
 Scriv


 Matt Liotta wrote:


 We don't do much Wi-Fi, so I figured I would ask the list. If I wanted
 to
 deploy a number of Wi-Fi radios at the same location what kind of
 setups
 are available? I am looking for something where I can deploy one
 physical
 box that has multiple radios as opposed to a single box per radio.
 Ideally, it would be something modular where I can have a variable
 number
 of radio interfaces by simply adding cards.

 Does anything like that exist?

 -Matt

 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations

[John J. Thomas]

The Telcos all over are deploying 400 mW units-anything that says 2WIRE is 400 
mW.

John

-Original Message-
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 09:12 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations

Precisely why X2 cloaking is so important.  It doubles the number of
channels and X4 gives 11 of them back to us.  X4 gives about 7 mbps
with non compressible data and over 12 mbps with compressible data.
Better than a standard B model with perfect conditions.

The other thing to keep in mind is that all of those channel 6 units
attached to ADSL lines are typically unused or lightly used.  They
connect with an ADSL line and thus cannot even begin to consume the
total air time.

The Telco here is distributing units with 400 mW radaios whether the
client even wants wireless in their home.  It does not even phase a
cloaked connection so we are OK with it.

Lonnie

On 2/15/07, Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 There USED to be three non overlapping channels.  Now channel 6 overlaps
 with every third house in many markets :-).
 Marlon

 - Original Message -
 From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:10 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations


  Standard Wifi has 3 channels that do not overlap.  X4 cloaking has 6
  channels that do not overlap and X4 cloaking has 11 channels that do
  not overlap.
 
  We use 4 WLM-54G radios in a WAR4 and have seen no great issues unless
  two active radios are on the same channel.  I am not sure about 6 but
  I know for sure that 4 works fine.  Incidentally the SR9 has almost NO
  leakage.  Even with the cards side by side they will not link up.  In
  order to get anything from them you need a pigtail and an antenna.
 
  Lonnie
 
  On 2/15/07, Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  I'd recommend against that idea Matt.  ALL devices leak some energy.  And
  the amount of interference you'll create for yourself at inches vs. feet
  is
  amazing.  If you can keep things 3 feet apart there is much less energy,
  small small fractions in fact.
 
  Alvarion with their FHSS gear can get away with such things because they
  can
  always stay enough hopping channels away from near by radios.  FHSS has
  72
  (or is it only 70?) channels to choose from.  WiFi has basically 2 these
  days.
 
  Where this one gets hard to explain is that people build such critters,
  test
  them in the lap and then say that they work.  Life will change
  dramatically
  however, once installed into a working system AND with the addition of
  real
  customers with real traffic.
 
  laters,
  marlon
 
  - Original Message -
  From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
  Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 11:24 AM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations
 
 
  I thought you were already working with Deliberant on just such an
  animal.
  Where are you guys with that? I know they have a dual radio unit capable
  of
  5 GHz and 2.4 GHz in the same box.
   Scriv
  
  
   Matt Liotta wrote:
  
   We don't do much Wi-Fi, so I figured I would ask the list. If I wanted
   to
   deploy a number of Wi-Fi radios at the same location what kind of
   setups
   are available? I am looking for something where I can deploy one
   physical
   box that has multiple radios as opposed to a single box per radio.
   Ideally, it would be something modular where I can have a variable
   number
   of radio interfaces by simply adding cards.
  
   Does anything like that exist?
  
   -Matt
  
   --
   WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
  
   Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
   http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
  
   Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
  --
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
 
 
  --
  Lonnie Nunweiler
  Valemount Networks Corporation
  http://www.star-os.com/
  --
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
Lonnie Nunweiler
Valemount Networks Corporation
http://www.star-os.com/
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Routers

[John J. Thomas]

cdw.com carries the Cisco 851W for $379. 

John



-Original Message-
From: Marlon K. Schafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 08:27 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers

Checkpoint has one for under $400 too.  I forgot about that one.  Dual wan 
with wireless.  Kinda cool.

I've not tried one yet, but did see them at ISPCon.

laters,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers


I too have that idea in action, but the port forwarding options are non 
existant... There has to be something out there that works...

 Thanks for the feedback.

 - Original Message - 
 From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:15 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers


 Ross Cornett wrote:
 Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line 
 of router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys 
 and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. 
 Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best?  I 
 am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their 
 lack of quality.  Your feedback is very welcome.


 Ross Cornett
 VP 217 342 6201 ex 7
 HofNet Communications, Inc.
 www.HofNet-Communications.com

 HofNet-Communications.com

 One more reason I use a cpe with built in router.

 I know your pain.

 George
 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV white spaces

[John J. Thomas]

inline...


-Original Message-
From: Patrick Leary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2007 10:52 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV white spaces

Here are few raw comments that might fray some nerves:

1. The FCC is not a baby sitter.
2. Mature operators (and industries as a whole) follow the rules as a
matter of course and expected cost of business.
3. You are not the public, you are commercial operators financially
benefiting off the public's free spectrum and you off all users should
thus be a responsible steward of that spectrum.
4. Those not following the rules have no ethical standing to complain
about other illegal use, predatory competitors, lack of spectrum, etc.

As someone who has argued for WISP compliance for years, I've certainly
been alarmed by what I see as a new level of non-compliance. WISPs are
now commonly assuming the FCC's lack of enforcement is tantamount to its
approval of abuse. The general attitude is now that there is but one
rule: Don't exceed the power limitations. Everything else has become
fair game.

Here is a list of things I see that lend anecdotal evidence, if not
actual, that abuse is reaching new levels:

- many WISPs now believe it is no big deal to use 4.9 GHz to carry some
commercial traffic (Hey, there's excess capacity so what's the big deal,
right?...)

 Many disagree with my view on things, but this is clearly wrong. 4.9 GHz is 
 a licensed band for PUBLIC SAFETY ONLY. If know somebody that is using it 
 illegally, they are a criminal. If you don't do something about it, you are 
 an accessory to the crime and just as guilty.


- use of STA's to commercially use spectrum is openly being advocated
(this is partially responsible for an over 6 month wait in STA filings)
- illegal vendors now operate in the clear with prominent U.S.
distribution (They must be legal if they have a store front and it only
hurts other vendors anyway...)
- build your own base station type Google ads are rampant

Call me an alarmist, but this accelerating trend is disturbing and such
attitudes easily even have the potential to infect safety issues (hey,
OSHA rules must not be that big a deal either).

We must all appreciate that many violating the rules do so out of
ignorance, but that as an excuse. Groups like WISPA should take firm
stands on subjects like this. You should strongly encourage compliance,
lead the way and educate. You should fight the ignorance that allows for
relativism and creative interpretation of the rules. You should also
not cave to the hard luck excuses that I'm a small guy and can't afford
to follow the rules. (Your response to such should be to point to
funding sources/advice or otherwise tell them that there is a minimum
cost to legally participate in this business and that following FCC
rules is a minimum expectation as responsible stewards of the public's
free spectrum.) And finally, WISPs should not treat knowingly illegal
operators as equals because in fact they are liabilities to you and the
industry at large.

And yes, of course I have skin in the game but that in no way alters
anything here or devalues my comments. If anything, as a legal vendor
with a long professional reputation of compliance and scores of legal
operator partners, and as an individual who has been beating this drum
for 7 years, it should only increase the weight of my comments.

Sincerely,

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 9:26 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces

All,

Remember, it only takes a few bad apples to make the whole industry look

bad.
Think about that the next time anyone wants to complain about the rules.

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Patrick Leary wrote:

I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that
the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of
WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the
lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines.

From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the
usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where
people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access
to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist.

Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that
will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected.

The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and
discouraging the slippery slope.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Monday, February 05, 

Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings - Competing

[John J. Thomas]

I am going to be specific here

What mechanism do you have in place to 'protect' your network from the person 
that downloads 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If you sold me a connection that 
was 256k for $39.99 I would feel that I have a right to use it as much as I 
want.

I am not saying bit cap, I am saying tiered pricing. I am sure that most here 
can break their clients into 3 groups;

1. the people that rarely use their Internet, possibly 300-500 megabytes per 
month.

2. The average user that probably uses 2-5 Gigabytes per month.

3. The bandwidth hog that is using 20 Gigs plus per month and complains when 
their speed teest falls for 5 k bits per second.

My argument is that ISPs need to have a mechanism to make the people in the 
last group either pay their fair share, or go somewhere else.

John


-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 11:46 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings - Competing

I'm sure much of this will already have been covered (been out for a
couple of days).  But since it was addressed to me

Don't know the details of the truck driver story, but if it wasn't his
responsibility all he needs to do is leave the truck blocking the
loading dock and walk into the store and ask the manager to call his
boss and they can get it sorted from there.

As for the pickles, if Walmart decides all they want to pay for a gallon
of pickles is 3.97 that is their right.  No one is forcing anyone to
sell at 3.97.

The legislature of CA is costing CA millions of dollars each year, not
Walmart.  If the legislature wants to pick up the tab for workers who
aren't insured by their employer that is their own fault.  Are you going
to complain about every other business in CA that doesn't insure their
employees?

A little bit of research on the internet will also fill me in about
black helicopters and tinfoil hats...

The trick is conveying to your customer what your plan is in terms that 
they understand.  I'm in a primarily residential market and compete with
DSL.  The selling point of my service, is just that service.  I still
have to compete with Qwest pricing but I only have to be close on cost
to speed and sell them on the service.  It isn't that hard to sell
service vs the phone company.

But I have to disagree with everyone that is on the bitcap bandwagon.  I
understand fully the issues that come with p2p and streaming video but
that is what is driving the internet today.

I take pride in providing the internet to my customers and I want to
provide the type of internet service I would expect from my connection. 

The internet is no longer about web pages and email it is about
podcasts, video streams and downloaded movies and if we aren't ready to 
provide that type of service they we are just relagating ourselves to
being the new dialup with 128K plans and draconian bandwidth policies.

I don't see bit metering (paying by the bit not on a transfer rate) as
being a billing model for the future because every other communication
model is trending away from it and I doubt the customer will put up with
it given a choice.  Phone service is abandoning the per minute pricing
for pricing plans which are tending toward unlimited minutes (mobile to 
mobile, home network, after hours).

Also as more and more services migrate to the internet people are not
going to want to worry about their bit caps.  The idea of having to look
at the file size of a netflix movie download and they try to figure out 
how much it is going to cost me to download (above the netflix cost)
reminds me all to much of the old dailup days when we were paying by the
minute.

As a businessman you should be trying to squeeze every last dime out of 
your customers.  The trick is to provide the service that will make them
want to pay every last dime of it.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

John J. Thomas wrote:
 Sam, Walmart has made most of its money by screwing others.

 Truck driver makes delivery to Walmart ad unload pallets. Goes to have 
 receiving sign for them. Receiving refuses to sign, and says that *after* 
 the truck driver *unloads* the items off the pallets, then he will sign. 
 This is NOT the truck drivers responsibility.

 Walmart decides that a Gallon jar of pickles shoud cost $3.97-*regardless* 
 of whether the company can make 10 cents on that. Company sells $3.97 jar of 
 pickles and goes bankrupt after that.

 Walmart is costing the State of California Millions of dollars each year 
 just by telling its employees  we won't give you that benefit, but if you 
 go apply for State assistance, they will.

 A little bit of research on the Internet will show you to what degree they 
 have gone to to screw others. If that is the way you want to do business, 
 then so be it. Me, my family and anyone else I have influence over won't do 
 business with you-period.

 You have to structure your pricing in a way that you can

Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings - Competing

[John J. Thomas]

Sam, Walmart has made most of its money by screwing others.

Truck driver makes delivery to Walmart ad unload pallets. Goes to have 
receiving sign for them. Receiving refuses to sign, and says that *after* the 
truck driver *unloads* the items off the pallets, then he will sign. This is 
NOT the truck drivers responsibility.

Walmart decides that a Gallon jar of pickles shoud cost $3.97-*regardless* of 
whether the company can make 10 cents on that. Company sells $3.97 jar of 
pickles and goes bankrupt after that.

Walmart is costing the State of California Millions of dollars each year just 
by telling its employees  we won't give you that benefit, but if you go apply 
for State assistance, they will.

A little bit of research on the Internet will show you to what degree they have 
gone to to screw others. If that is the way you want to do business, then so be 
it. Me, my family and anyone else I have influence over won't do business with 
you-period.

You have to structure your pricing in a way that you can successfully market. I 
have a problem with those people that say 512k unlimited $39.99 per month. 
Then, when you download a single movie, they cut your service. That is 
Dishonesty-period. If you tell your clients, 4 Gig for $39.99, then there is no 
issue. I'm sure MANY are going to jump in and tell me I'm wrong, and they 
certainly have a right to. At some point, this will have to be the way it 
works-you can't sell unlimited pipes for $39.99 per month, when you have to pay 
$100 or more per month-the economics are not there.

I applaud Marlon for what he is doing, and I hope that he will review his 
pricing regularly. If he finds that he can drop the rates a bit, or adjust the 
limits upward, I'm sure his clients will appreciate it. They should also 
appreciate that fact that he isn't trying to squeeze every last dime from them.

John Thomas



-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 10:49 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings - Competing

There actually are some of us out here that don't have this luxury in
our markets.  My total market is approximately 3000 people (not
households) and I have to go 45 miles in any direction to find another
town with more than 80 people in it.

I'm not saying this in a 'woe is me' tone, just stating a fact.  Some of
us operate in the well under 10,000 people areas where 'finding a higher
ARPU customer' is not really a viable option.  We have to be all things 
in order to have enough customers to pay the bills.  The top 10% of my
market would get me less than 100 customers and they would have an
average income of less than $100K.

As a slightly off-topic aside:  (those that don't want to listen to my
ramblings can safely stop here :)

I do find the Walmart reference interesting.  Since I have started this 
business I have tried to read as much as I can in terms of business,
marketing  and sales books.  Having come from a purely tech background
it astounds me how clueless I really was until I started a business.

One of the things that I have struggled with is the price point vs
service aspect of the business.  Obviously being the cheapest option has
it's sales advantages, especially in the residential best effort
internet business.  But as we all know, being the cheapest makes it a
bit harder to pay the bills.

When I read business and marketing books they all espouse the higher end
customer is the better customer view.  I understand this view, you have 
a valued customer who is willing to pay a reasonable price for quality
service.  You look at brands like Lexus and Bose and think, these are
the people I need to be like.  These companies have made millionaires.

But what I find interesting is that companies like Walmart and McDonalds
who do live in the quantity, not quality world have made billionaires.  
The trick seems to be, if you can somehow manages to be the cheapest and
do it right you can make a boat load of money and it doesn't have to be 
at the expense of the customer.

  Sam Tetherow
  Sandhills Wireless

Peter R. wrote:
 John J. Thomas wrote:

 But, the model will work if you bill by the bytes

 If Joe is paying $40 per month for 6 Gig and gets throttled at 6 Gig,
 then he has a disincentive for keeping going. If he is paying $40 for
 unlimited access, he has no reason to slow down.

 Charter cable is doing 10 meg down/1 meg up in some markets for like 
 $99 per month, how can you compete with that?

 John

 Well, the reality is this: you can't compete with it.  And why try?
 Why not move upstream to a larger ARPU customer?
 Cable  ILEC can handle and deliver service to the masses cheaply -
 for now.
 But there is a segment of every population that needs more than the
 cheap dumb pipe attached to the cheap dumb support. That is the GAP.
 That is where the money is.

 That is where your market is. But it may mean selling beyond just a pipe.

 I've been

Re: [WISPA] Re: [WISP] New report on Muni Wifi

[John J. Thomas]

True, to be fair, there are Munis doing private Wireless, public wireless and 
both. Most Munis see the benefit of doing it private, although some are still 
politically tempted to do the public or public-private mix to make them some 
campaign points. When we work with cities and they say they want to do public, 
we tell them it is a bad idea and give them reasons why.

John


-Original Message-
From: Dawn DiPietro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 05:52 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: [WISP] New report on Muni Wifi

Marlon,

You cannot lump all municipal networks together which you do on a
regular basis. According to a recent study
only about 50% of muni networks provide access to the public. In the
same report it mentions that there are
less and less municipalities taking on this responsibility and
outsourcing it to companies that do this work day in and day out.

So yes this article is accurate but not for the reasons you may think.Of
course I could be wrong about what you are thinking. ;-)

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro






Dawn DiPietro wrote:

 Marlon,

 You want to know what else is funny?
 How you just pick and choose what you want to hear.

 Regards,
 Dawn

 Marlon K. Schafer wrote:

 MessageFunny how so few press outlets will ever talk about anything
 at all negative about muni networks.  This is clearly biased, but
 it's still a breath of fresh air to me!
 marlon

  - Original Message -  From: Cameron  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 7:28 PM
  Subject: [WISP] New report on Muni Wifi


  FYI

  http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/10/municipal_wi-fi_survey/





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings - Competing

[John J. Thomas]

 Mark, how would you like to be the employee at an American television tube 
manufacturer and then lose your job and watch the plant close. The manufacturer 
found that foreign companies were dumping their product on the American market 
so they filed suit. When push came to shove, Walmart filed against them, siding 
with the foreign market in what was clearly an ILLEGAL practice. Time ran out 
and the company had to close its doors. Business people love to look at the 
Walmart model in envy, but I doubt those same people would ever work for the 
company. I have no problem with businesses that are legal, ethical and moral, 
and Walmart has been proven to be lacking in all 3 areas.

John Thomas



-Original Message-
From: wispa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 03:39 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings - Competing

On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 14:27:22 -0800, George Rogato wrote
 Blake Bowers wrote:

You know, the only real difference between WalMart and most other retailers,
is that what the manufacturer agrees to do, WalMart holds them to.
Rubbermaid, Vlasic Pickles, Bicycle makers, the list goes on and on.  All of
them agreed to do X, Y, and Z and each found out they had agreed to do things
they didn't know how to do, or could not do.

Many companies agreed to sell to WalMart at less than their cost, and went
broke trying to keep up with demand.   WalMart is a huge market.  They sell
in 3 months what the next largest retailer (the second largest retailer, that
is) in the world sells in a year.

Walmart insists that prices must FALL, not rise, and that they must be
competitive.   Walmart's profit on some items is on the order of 1 to 5%, and
those are not large items, either.  They DO their part in passing on revenues
to manufacturers.  Nobody exists on slimmer margins than WalMart does.

There's a trail of dead or damaged companies in WalMart's wake, but it wasn't
Walmart that did it to them.  It was their own greed or incompetence, when
they were offered a chance at the largest retailer's shelf space in the 
world, and took it in terms they could NOT sustain.

There's a lesson for all of us in that, in that we really SHOULD know our
capabilities and have a plan to deal with both growth and competition.  Can
we handle success?  Can we keep our word, do we know our own selves well
enough to make our plans and stick to them with discipline?

Will we promise what we can't deliver, if it appears to promise us growth?

Every company that sells products to WalMart knows exactly what they're 
expected to do when they start out.  Many think they can get concessions, or
have unrealistic expectations.

I spent quite a bit of time reading about this...  And I resolved at that
moment, no matter what the future, I resolve to know what I'm doing, where
I'm going, and what I and my company can and cannot do.

I sort of turned over a new leaf after reading and digesting.  It was a good
way to start 2007.  Inspired by WalMart, no less.  Hate them if you want, but
I don't and can't.  They're a breath of fresh air in a world of fudging,
loose focus and blind ambition.   They have an absolute resolute goal they
have never wavered on, and that has always been the customer.  WE need that
kind of discipline and focus, too, as companies and individuals.  NEver 
forget what we're here for.



 
  The pickles...  The famous pickles.  Got to love it.  You tie the
  pickles with the
  bankruptcy, when every industry analyst, all the business mags, Vlasic
  themselves,
  all agree, Walmart or the pickle deal was not a critical factor in their
  bankruptcy.

 Not sure about pickles, but I have heard the Rubbermaid story.
 Walmart, dropped Rubbermaid off at the door of bakruptcy. Popular
 story about the way they do business.

 All Walmart business practices do is give everyone an example of
 extreme agressiveness of those sharks out there.

 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



Mark Koskenmaki   Neofast, Inc
Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains
541-969-8200

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings - Competing

[John J. Thomas]

 I read an article once about this. What happens when Walmart can't drop prices 
any lower? Who foots the bill when Walmart employees get sick and go to the 
Emergency room? 

John

-Original Message-
From: Peter R. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 03:46 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings - Competing

Blake Bowers wrote:

 Actually, Walmart has made most of its money by providing the CONSUMER 
 with
 what the CONSUMER wants.

 Walmart fills only what the consumer wants.   That is how they make 
 money,
 by meeting those consumer needs/desires.  When a customer wants
 an apple for ten cents, you don't fulfill those needs by offering an 
 orange for
 twenty cents!

Actually, are they supplying what a consumer wants?
Or simply offering low prices?
Don't confuse the 2.

Many people want cheaper - or the perception of cheaper.
When you are selling commodities, it usually does come down to price.

Yet Target sells many of the same items and has a much higher check out 
average per customer.
Customer service, neatness, variety, and plain ole English are all 
things missing from Walmart, IMO.

At what point does that model - of dropping prices - stop working?
(I have noticed that Walmart is often not the cheapest.)
And this model only works when you can capture market share.

- Peter



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings, By Speed or All You Can Eat? Was: Advanced Bandwidth Management

[John J. Thomas]

But, the model will work if you bill by the bytes

If Joe is paying $40 per month for 6 Gig and gets throttled at 6 Gig, then he 
has a disincentive for keeping going. If he is paying $40 for unlimited access, 
he has no reason to slow down.

Charter cable is doing 10 meg down/1 meg up in some markets for like $99 per 
month, how can you compete with that?

John 

-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 07:59 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Offerings,By Speed or All You Can Eat? 
Was:   Advanced Bandwidth Management

No... I don't think that model works... because Joe Surfer sees how fast 
this last movie downloaded and decides to grab 3 more while he's at it...
The model of the customer will use what they are going to use and then 
get off is not true... imagine if Joe Surfer figures out he can 
download the movies AND still surf, check email, etc. at the same time? 
Then he can just leave it downloading 24x7. :(

Travis
Microserv

RickG wrote:
 Sorry guys for hijacking the thread but this hit a chord...

 I've sold bandwidth in all sorts of ways but the most prevalent is by
 speed which is the  way  am currently doing it. My question is this:
 What if you played the cable game and just sell  all you can eat?
 Would that not free up your network more quickly for everybody else?
 Example: Joe Surfer downloads movies on demand but is too cheap to buy
 your highest speed offering. So, he buys your slowest speed and ties
 up your network much longer. Just  looking for some opinions here ;)

 Thanks!
 RickG

 On 1/24/07, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 OR, we could stop playing the Cable Co. and Telco games with their up
 to 3meg and up to 7meg connections for $34.95 and just start selling
 what they get.

 We started selling 512k, 1meg, 1.5meg and 2meg connections (up and down,
 guaranteed speed 24x7) about 3 years ago. It was the best thing we ever
 did... people get what they pay for, and when they need more, they buy
 more. No games, no burstable speeds, etc.

 Make your customers pay for what they need and use.

 Travis
 Microserv

 Blair Davis wrote:
  We sell mainly to residential users and to some small businesses.
 
  We are quite rural, and my cost for a T-1 is $450 per month.  My
  pending fiber hookup is $1100 per month for 5Mbit.
 
  A bit ago, a business customer's new IT consultant complained that the
  256Kbit committed rate for $60 a month was over priced.  He demanded a
  1Mbit committed rate and no price change.  I explained this was not
  possible.  He was quite nasty and told me he was recommending that the
  customer find a new ISP.  I, fed up with his big city attitude, told
  him to go right ahead.  He said to come pick up the gear on this
  Friday.  Although, I might have lost my temper a bit and used some
  words that the FCC doesn't permit on the phone..
 
  After he was quoted $600 per month for a T1, (and $9500 install), and
  a 3 month lead time, he called me back...
 
  He decided that my offer of 1Mbit committed rate (6am-6pm, Mon-Fri)
  and a 256Kbit committed rate at other times) for $250 a month was a
  damn good deal..
 
  The point of this, is that, for many customers, pricing and bandwidth
  expectations are being driven by the cheap bandwidth in the large
  cites  Out here in the real world, it don't work that way.
 
  The other point is, that with a good mix of residential and business
  customers, and a little creative thinking, one can match their usage
  patterns to minimize ones peak bandwidth requirements while still
  providing the 'fast, snappy feel' that the users prefer
 
  Just my $.02
 
 
  J. Vogel wrote:
 
  I would suspect that the customer (as is the case in much of the 
 world,
  not necessarily in the limited
  world you may operate in) does not want to, or in many case could not
  pay for such a pipe. In many
  areas of the US, especially rural, bandwidth is extremely expensive.
  Customers do not want to pay
  close to $1k / month for their residential connection to the 
 internet,
  yet the customer would like to
  access the internet at speed approaching 1.5 mbps (or even faster)
  whenever they can. In such a case
  it makes sense, is good business practice, and not at all 
 unethical to
  sell customers shared bandwidth.
 
  In cases such as these, the question posed by the OP is a valid
  question, and deserves an answer
  other than one which implies that they may be doing something they
  should not be. The world is a big
  place. It is good to get out and see parts of it you may not have 
 seen
  lately.
 
  John
 
  Matt Liotta wrote:
 
 
  Have you thought about selling the customer a pipe that works for 
 any
  and all traffic at the speed the customer signed up for as 
 opposed to
  deciding for the customer?
 
  -Matt
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 

Re: [WISPA] Need opinion

[John J. Thomas]

Carlos, the Cisco 1242's bridge, but need to be put in a NEMA box to be outdoor 
rated. You can get them for about $500 on the street. Now, before everyone 
jumps on, YES, they are more expensive than Mikrotik and some others, but they 
do bridge well.

JT


-Original Message-
From: Carlos A. Garcia G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 08:21 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Need opinion

Thank u very much at the list the opinions that you gaved me has help me
a lot, as far as i could see it is that its better to work with 4 radio 
bridges, not the las time i did that i use cisco 2.4 1310 bridge i have 
to say that works very stable, but the solution for 5.8 its the 1400 as 
far as i remember only one bridge has the cost of 4000 us, that much
more expensive that i tought so i have checked another products recently
i checked proxim QuickBridge.11 5054-R, who has used the proxim
equipments, any one with experience can tell me about it?

Chad Halsted escribió:
 StarOS has the ability to run a VDS tunnel from any two StarOS V3
 devices.  That will enable you to run a 128 or 256 bit AES encrypted
 tunnel.  If memory serves me correctly, Lonnie is able to get 15mbps
 or more out of that type of setup?

 If you're worried about interference, try x2 or x4 cloaking on the
 5GHz bands.

 I'm getting ready to install a dedicated T1 replacement, the customer
 was worried about security.  The ability to encrypt with AES won them
 over.

 I should have said 3 WAR boards, not RADIOS, sorry about the
 confusion.  The amount of radios you use is up to you, but you would
 want atleast 4 radio cards for what you're trying to do.


 On 12/12/06, Carlos A. Garcia G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Ok, following your recomendations in order to set up the link without
 using more than 3 radios what you recommend its to use th WAR from
 Staros i have a wireless repeaters using cisco so the extra radios for
 customers are not necesary (sorry my english) if i use this

 NOC war with one antenna and radio at 5.8GHz to connect with the middle
 POP war dual 2 radios 2 antennas at 5.8GHz and finally the customer
 POP war
 and what about security the guy ask me to doit secure meaning not easy
 for the folks. (he knows total security its an utopia a Guajiro dream!!)

 Lonnie Nunweiler escribió:
  My recommendation is to have a dual WAR board at the main POP.  Use a
  5 GHz antenna and radio to connect tot the middle repeater and have a
  2.4 GHz with an omni at the main just to be able to connect any local
  customers.  The biggest investment is the CPU board and time to
  install, and an extra radio and 15 dB omni is cheap.  Even a couple of
  subscribers will make it pay.
 
  At the middle repeater I would use a dual WAR with 5 GHz radios to
  point to main and the remote end.  If you want some local service at
  that repeater then use a 4 port WAR and throw a 2.4 GHz and 900 MHz
  card in it or both 2.4 GHz or 900 MHz.  Your choice.
 
  The remote end is a copy of the main end with a dual WAR and 5 GHz
  input and a 2.4 GHz to an omni for local use.
 
  This arrangement will get you 20 to 30 mbps of sustained throughput as
  long as the middle repeater is no farther than 30 miles from either
  end.  You'll also have a couple of revenue generating AP units at each
  end and potentially the middle.
 
  Lonnie
 
  On 12/12/06, Carlos A. Garcia G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  I have just recived an answer from chad saying that starOS its a good
  choice, thanks chad ill check it, for your question yes i w'd like to
  play, i have never deployed my routers, but i really would like
 to, so
  im like a newbie compared to the people in this list but im hungry to
  learn the how to, thanks to everybody, this is an amazing list.
 
  Mario Pommier escribió:
   Carlos,
  that's your first item, your line of thinking seems accurate:
  
  Cisco, Proxim, Trango, Alvarion, StarOS, Mikrotik -- what
 equipment
   will you choose and what is the advantage/disadvantage of each.
  Maybe your first perspective is: do you want to go with a
   finished, packaged product, or do you want to be able to play
 more
   with the tools and toys out there?
  The type of computer person you are may be a good guide: do you
   deploy your own Unix/Linux based routers or do you buy Cisco
 finished
   products?
  Hope that helps some.
  
   Mario
  
   Carlos A. Garcia G wrote:
  
   Thank u very much, but the question it is, i do not know many
   equipments, i have only work with cisco aironet, the last time 
 i do
   something similar and get the cisco 1300 series the problem it is
   that in order that this work i have to use 4 radios
  
   1300--[1300 -ethernet-1300]--1300
  
   and what i need it is to know for example: the proxim LMG22
 work in
   5.8 and can be used as:
  
 LMG22--LMG22--LMG22
  
   im currently looking with cisco, proxym, trango, mikrotik but i
 dont
   get the answer that 

Re: [WISPA] bare conduits

[John J. Thomas]

I have heard of people using something resembling a ping pong ball, pressure on 
one end and vacuum on the other to push a small string/ribbon through. Once 
that is done you just pull bigger string until you get the size you want.

John

-Original Message-
From: chris cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2006 09:24 AM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: [WISPA] bare conduits

Im looking at a project that requires connectivity between multiple
buildings on the same campus.  There are 4 conduits connecting each
facility.  The conduits are bare, Id like to run fiber in them, and
there are no pull cords in them.  Some are several hundred yards long.
Ive heard that you can blow a cable through a conduit.  Can anyone
enlighten me on equipment/technique for this application?



Thanks

Chris

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Low power Ethernet Switch

[John J. Thomas]

These guys aren't cheap...

http://www.korenix-usa.com/JetNet4500.htm

John


-Original Message-
From: David E. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2006 09:41 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low power Ethernet Switch

D. Ryan Spott wrote:
 Looking for a VERY low wattage 12 or 24  volt switch.
 
 Does anyone have any recommendations?
 
 I need it for a remote tower running 12 and 24 volt solar.

No, but I'll see your question and raise you another question.

Anyone have any recommendations on (if this even exists) small managed 
or semi-managed switches? Basically, I just want to be able to graph 
traffic by port, and mybe shut off a given port, but you usually 
only find that in physically large (i.e. rackmount) switches. I want 
something like that, but with only five or maybe eight ports, small 
enough to stick in an outdoor enclosure.

David Smith
MVN.net
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Outsourced installations

[John J. Thomas]

inline...

-Original Message-
From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:22 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Outsourced installations

Until, the IRS decides that they can not be considered a contractor, because 
they do not do work for other people, and are not solely in control of how a 
job gets done.
To do it legal, its pretty important that installer's company becomes 
Incorporated or LLC.  Once they do that, its hard to keep control of what they 
do, and you loose benefits of Employing.
Benefits of employing, does that exist ? :-)

I guess the truth is, can you find installers willing to give up benefits of 
being an employee, and still be available when you need them like an employee?

 If you pay them well and give them enough work so they don't starve

John


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


  - Original Message -
  From: Rick Smith
  To: 'WISPA General List'
  Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 7:27 PM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] Outsourced installations


  the answer is hire a company to do installations for you.  if your employee 
 just happens to own that company, well, oh well…



  It’s all invoices.   Pay them as normal, and you don’t need to worry about 
 taxes, etc.  Your employee (or sub’d company J…) does that on their own.



  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
  Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 5:28 PM
  To: WISPA General List
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Outsourced installations



  Where the problems come in are, that paying someone peice rate does NOT 
 NEGATE the requirement to pay overtime for Employees.

  Nor does it Negate the IRS's definition of what an EMployee is and a 
 contractor is.



  You have to restrict employees to work less than 40 hours or prepair to pay 
 time and a half for your peice rate.  If an employee works 60 hours, and 
 completes three installs at in that week, at a peice rate of $100 each you 
 would pay the employee.



  $300 / 60 hours = $5 per hour. Overtime (20 hours) would be paid on $100 of 
 the pay.  Addtional over time pay (half time) would be $50.

  Total paycheck would be $350.



  If it took them 60 hours to just get two installs done, they would be less 
 than the minimum wage.



  So there are two requirements

  1) You must have a minimum pay, calcuated on the total number of hours that 
 THEY record working.

  2) Must figure out someones average hourly rate on a weekly basis. This 
 complicates the accounting duties, and forces the account to custom pay each 
 employee each month.



  Two problems that can occur are...



  What if you want to pay an employee well, because they are really doing a 
 good job, and then one week they decide to go really slow?  You end up paying 
 someone a huge amount of overtime unexpectedly!



  What we learned was that a employee's record of stated hours worked was 
 accurate.  So paying peice rate does NOT NEGATE the need of the management to 
 record  and manage the hours worked by an employee.  We learned, that an 
 Employer is NOT responsible for their productivity the employer is.  So if 
 they go to the movies all day without you knowing it, and work late to get 
 the job done, you still owe them the overtime, regardless of what flat peice 
 rate you negotiated.



  These are some of the reasons that we chose to put employees on Salary 
 instead of Piece rate.  We live in a sue happy county. We just plan on 
 everyone taking way to long for an install, and put very low expectations on 
 what they are expected to accomplish, and we save on management and 
 accounting salaries.  If they get done early, we have them do other things.  
 I won't talk about what happens if they don't get their work done, thats 
 handled on a case by case basis.  So we chose salary for ease.  IF they 
 consistently do well, they get a higher salary and stock options.  It creates 
 a team effort, not a what do I get mentality.



  I don't know if that is the right decission or not, it really takes our guys 
 a long time to get things done. I often consider whether I should migrate 
 back to peice rate.





  Tom DeReggi
  RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
  IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband





- Original Message -

From: Pete Davis

To: WISPA General List

Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 9:10 AM

Subject: Re: [WISPA] Outsourced installations



According to the DOL (department of Labor) an employee can be paid by the 
 hour or for piece work (by the job)

from http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/minwage.htm

The Act requires employers of covered employees who are not otherwise 
 exempt to pay these employees a minimum wage of not less than $5.15 an hour 
 as of September 1, 1997. Youths under 20 years of age may be paid a minimum 
 wage of not less than $4.25 an hour during the first 90 consecutive calendar 
 days of 

Re: [WISPA] Outsourced installations

[John J. Thomas]

Id never said they couldn't be paid by the hour. I used to work for a roofing 
company, and they were regularly questioned about they way they paid their 
employees. If you have someone work in your office at for 6 hours, and then 
they go and flat-rate a 3 hour job, that looks like overtime to me, but then 
I am in California, and the labor laws here are more stringent than in a lot of 
other places.

John



-Original Message-
From: Pete Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 06:10 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Outsourced installations

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Outsourced installations

[John J. Thomas]

Yes, and, if for some reason they take too long on a job such that the 
flat-rate billing is less than Minimum wage, you get into hot water

John


-Original Message-
From: Scott Reed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 05:46 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Outsourced installations

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: OpenSER and CCME

[John J. Thomas]

If youare trying to use OpenSER, you will need to upgrade the handsets for SIP, 
SCCP won't work. If you have access to Cisco support, you can download the 
information to convert the handsets to SIP.

John




-Original Message-
From: Paul Hendry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 05:44 PM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: [WISPA] OT: OpenSER and CCME

Hi all,

This is slightly un wireless related but I was wondering if anyone else is
using OpenSER for there VoIP platform and if anyone has managed to get Cisco
Call Manager Express to work nicely with it? Just spent the last 12 hours
straight trying to get all the SCCP handsets that connect to CCME to then
call through OpenSER and all have the same CLI but it don't want to work :(
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.3/446 - Release Date: 12/09/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Bragging on Mikrotik

[John J. Thomas]

Butch, to do Layer 3 fast roaming, Cisco uses GRE tunnels into a WLSM module. 
That combined with CCX extensions allow them to do under 50 ms handoffs. 
Supposedly, just the CCX extensions make it possible for under 150 ms handoffs. 
I wonder if it is possible for Mikrotik to implement any of these protocols.

http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/765/ccx/versions_and_features.shtml

John



-Original Message-
From: Butch Evans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2006 08:54 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bragging on Mikrotik

On Wed, 6 Sep 2006, Brian Rohrbacher wrote:

How long is a ping?  Isn't windows ping like 4 sec?  7 times 4 = 28
seconds. To me, (if my math is correct) 28 sec is frustrating, not
seamless.

Perhaps seamless is not the proper word.  We did some testing
today and a cop used his laptop at 6 locations throughout the city
to surf the web and do license checks.  From his perspective, it was
seamless.  From the perspective of the network...there were seams.
Is that a more clear explanation?

--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] fiber connection for bridgewave

[John J. Thomas]

Does $400 include terminating ans testing Single mode? That is very cheap if 
so. Even for multi mode, $400 is a reasonable rate.

John

-Original Message-
From: Brad Belton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2006 09:16 AM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: RE: [WISPA] fiber connection for bridgewave

We've always contracted out our fiber work, but be careful as not all fiber
techs are equal in their abilities.  

We've settled on a group that is reasonable for small jobs and charges us
$400 for eight connectors total including travel and parts.  They do a great
job no matter what type connector or type of fiber used.

We tried a cheaper fiber group once.  After several attempts by two
different techs they told us the fiber we had was bad they couldn't shoot
any light through it.  I said thank you very much, here's your sign and
asked them to leave.  

Next day the fiber was terminated by our usual group.  That was a few years
ago and we haven't felt it necessary to look for another fiber tech since.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mario Pommier
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 10:25 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] fiber connection for bridgewave

Has anyone here delved into the option of terminating fiber runs for a 
bridgewave gigabit link?
What's more economical -- to hire out the termination job or getting 
training and buying the terminating equipment onself?
If the latter, where have you gotten the training and equipment?  (I've 
heard the equipment is expensive).

Mario


---
[This e-mail was scanned for viruses by our AntiVirus Protection System]

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] photo cell power

[John J. Thomas]

I don't remember the name offhand, the next time I get near one, I  will get it 
for you.

We have been disappointed with the convergence time, and distance coverage in 5 
GHz, but this may be due to a flaky AP. We will be doing some more work and 
range testing in the next couple of weeks. 

I think you had asked about the discount for Cisco wirelss purchases over 
25,000. I have got an exact answer, but the discount is in the 40-45% off list 
range.

John 


-Original Message-
From: Dylan Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 05:24 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] photo cell power

Hi John,

Do you know the name of the company which makes the adapters for Cisco?

Also, how are the 1500s holding up?

Best,
-- 
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] photo cell power

[John J. Thomas]

inline
-Original Message-
From: John J. Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 03:22 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re:  [WISPA] photo cell power

I don't remember the name offhand, the next time I get near one, I  will get 
it for you.

We have been disappointed with the convergence time, and distance coverage in 
5 GHz, but this may be due to a flaky AP. We will be doing some more work and 
range testing in the next couple of weeks.

I think you had asked about the discount for Cisco wireless purchases over 
25,000. I **don't** have an exact answer, but the discount is in the 40-45% 
off list range.

John


-Original Message-
From: Dylan Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 05:24 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] photo cell power

Hi John,

Do you know the name of the company which makes the adapters for Cisco?

Also, how are the 1500s holding up?

Best,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] photo cell power

[John J. Thomas]

Yes, that's how the Cisco 1500's are powered. The company that makes the 
adapters also makes them for othter devices.

John

-Original Message-
From: chris cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 11:01 AM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: [WISPA] photo cell power

Has anyone powered radios directly off street light photo cell adapters?
Any pros or cons would be appreciated.

 

Thanks

chris




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Forgetful

[John J. Thomas]

Someone is missing a GOLDEN opportunity here. If someone setup a site that 
charged a *small* fee to be listed, and then maybe a smaller fee (per use) to 
search,they could possibly make some money. I don't think it is worth $250 per 
year to do tower searches. I would probably be willing to pay $20 for a months 
worth of searches though.

John


-Original Message-
From: Blake Bowers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 07:49 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Forgetful

There are a number of sites out there, including

http://towers.conxx.net/

http://www.towermaps.com/

http://www.towersource.com/

The problem with the first one is that it is simply a dump of
the FCC data, and does not list any towers that are not
registered with the FCC.

The problem with the others is that while they list many
towers that are not registered with the FCC, they charge
for use.

There is no source that lists ALL the towers out there.


- Original Message -
From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:27 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Forgetful


Recently, someone posted a website that linked to all the towers in the 
country and that site was a listing of contact phone numbers for each tower.

can you please post that site again.

Thank you.


Ross Cornett
VP
217 342 6201 ex 7
HofNet Communications, Inc.
www.HofNet-Communications.com

HofNet-Communications.com






 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

[John J. Thomas]

2 Netgear FSM726   ~ $200 =  $ 400
2 Netgear AGM721F  ~ $285 =  $ 570
2 500 Meter SC SC patch cables ~ 779  =  $1558
+ conduit, trench etc.

is one way to go.

Antoher is ethernet extenders. These will let you go 4000 feet at 16.67 
Megabits per sec over voice grade twisted pair for about $600 per set.

John


-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 09:19 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

I know distance isn't as much of an issue with fiber, but Marlon talked 
about ethernet *OR* fiber so I guess I was thinking ethernet over 
standard copper and was wondering if I was missing something 
simple/cheap to get/around over the 100m limit.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

John J. Thomas wrote:

Multi mode fiber can go 550 meters, single mode can go 70 kilometers or more 
between repeaters.

John


  

-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 10:04 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

Marlon, how would you have done the ethernet?  I thought you were 
restricted to basically 300 feet of ethernet without a 
switch/router/booster every 300 feet or so, or am I missing something?  
I have pole rights in town a $1/pole/yr so I'm trying to find an 
affordable use of them.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:



We use dry copper, wireless, fiber and dsl for backhaul.  I've not 
built my own fiber yet.  I'm sure the day is coming though.

I really screwed up a few years ago.  The town had the sidewalks all 
out down town.  I should have found the money and put some conduit in 
at that time.  I could have ethernet or fiber connections to all of 
the down town businesses today!  sigh

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - From: Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 11:31 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?


  

I am looking to talk with someone that has laid some fiber to complement
their wireless operations.  We have a couple of leads we are looking at
making some short hop backbones between towers, and having the cities 
get
involved as a customer of fiber, and hopefully it will pay for the 
venture.

On or off list replys welcome.

Thanks

Mike
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 


  

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





  


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

[John J. Thomas]

:-)  I smile when I read the fiber specs sometimes. I understand that single 
mode was supposed to go 10 km, but some manufacturers got together and figured 
out that they can easily go 70 km. + 

John




-Original Message-
From: Patrick Leary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 09:10 AM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

Graded index 850nm/1300nm multimode, at least back in 1990 or so when I was
a fiber tech, had basic specs that permitted 2km before repeating. I
installed many projects with those distances before repeating. Actual
equipment tolerances would have enabled the real distance to be much
further. And that was with LED-based equipment, not even LASER.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 9:19 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

I know distance isn't as much of an issue with fiber, but Marlon talked 
about ethernet *OR* fiber so I guess I was thinking ethernet over 
standard copper and was wondering if I was missing something 
simple/cheap to get/around over the 100m limit.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

John J. Thomas wrote:

Multi mode fiber can go 550 meters, single mode can go 70 kilometers or
more between repeaters.

John


  

-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 10:04 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

Marlon, how would you have done the ethernet?  I thought you were 
restricted to basically 300 feet of ethernet without a 
switch/router/booster every 300 feet or so, or am I missing something?  
I have pole rights in town a $1/pole/yr so I'm trying to find an 
affordable use of them.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:



We use dry copper, wireless, fiber and dsl for backhaul.  I've not 
built my own fiber yet.  I'm sure the day is coming though.

I really screwed up a few years ago.  The town had the sidewalks all 
out down town.  I should have found the money and put some conduit in 
at that time.  I could have ethernet or fiber connections to all of 
the down town businesses today!  sigh

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - From: Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 11:31 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?


  

I am looking to talk with someone that has laid some fiber to complement
their wireless operations.  We have a couple of leads we are looking at
making some short hop backbones between towers, and having the cities 
get
involved as a customer of fiber, and hopefully it will pay for the 
venture.

On or off list replys welcome.

Thanks

Mike
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 


  

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





  


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses(192).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses(42).




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

[John J. Thomas]

Oops, forgot the link

http://www.patton.com/products/pe_products.asp?category=162tab=fbMiDAS_SessionID=c71906728f2547be800411b59ae3244a

John



-Original Message-
From: John J. Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 07:39 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re:  [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?


2 Netgear FSM726   ~ $200 =  $ 400
2 Netgear AGM721F  ~ $285 =  $ 570
2 500 Meter SC SC patch cables ~ 779  =  $1558
+ conduit, trench etc.

is one way to go.

Antoher is ethernet extenders. These will let you go 4000 feet at 16.67 
Megabits per sec over voice grade twisted pair for about $600 per set.

John


-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 09:19 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

I know distance isn't as much of an issue with fiber, but Marlon talked 
about ethernet *OR* fiber so I guess I was thinking ethernet over 
standard copper and was wondering if I was missing something 
simple/cheap to get/around over the 100m limit.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

John J. Thomas wrote:

Multi mode fiber can go 550 meters, single mode can go 70 kilometers or more 
between repeaters.

John


  

-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 10:04 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?

Marlon, how would you have done the ethernet?  I thought you were 
restricted to basically 300 feet of ethernet without a 
switch/router/booster every 300 feet or so, or am I missing something?  
I have pole rights in town a $1/pole/yr so I'm trying to find an 
affordable use of them.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:



We use dry copper, wireless, fiber and dsl for backhaul.  I've not 
built my own fiber yet.  I'm sure the day is coming though.

I really screwed up a few years ago.  The town had the sidewalks all 
out down town.  I should have found the money and put some conduit in 
at that time.  I could have ethernet or fiber connections to all of 
the down town businesses today!  sigh

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - From: Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 11:31 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Anyone mixing fiber with your wireless deployments?


  

I am looking to talk with someone that has laid some fiber to complement
their wireless operations.  We have a couple of leads we are looking at
making some short hop backbones between towers, and having the cities 
get
involved as a customer of fiber, and hopefully it will pay for the 
venture.

On or off list replys welcome.

Thanks

Mike
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 


  

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





  


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] DC Inverter help

[John J. Thomas]

Mac, have you looked at these?


http://www.apcc.com/products/family/index.cfm?id=203

John

Message-
From: Mac Dearman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 9, 2006 07:34 PM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: RE: [WISPA] DC Inverter help


Can anyone give me a lead as to what I am looking for? I believe this
http://tinyurl.com/lje7s is what I need, but I don't think I need 400Watts
as all I will be pulling at several new tower sites are a few RB532's with
their radios. I think I ought to keep the RB532s powered at 48VDC as they
will be in excess of 200' up a tower. My intentions are to put a couple
Marine batteries in an enclosure for back up power and have the DC inverter
to keep them charged and have a seamless transfer if a power outage comes
along. I have been putting these big honking APC UPSs in all my enclosures,
but am trying to get something that will last longer in times of outages

Any help would surely be a appreciated.

Thanks folks,
Mac 


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Fw: Wireless In Washington

[John J. Thomas]

This should be reason enough for a close look at TOS and pricing mechanisms. If 
your clients have to pay more for usage, then they will think twice before 
buying into this.

Fry's Electronics usually has a $20 wireless router on sale so this is not the 
only possible threat. The $20 wireless router they sell usually freezes after a 
couple of hours of heavy usage though...

John


-Original Message-
From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 08:08 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WISPA] Fw: Wireless In Washington

For those that still think the all you can eat option is a good one :-)

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message -

This guy needs to get a job from FON. 
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200989,00.html



  Wi-Fi Company to Sell Routers for Five Dollars

  Monday, June 26, 2006




   STORIES

.

Reports of Death of Dial-Up Internet Greatly Exaggerated



  LONDON  - FON, a Spanish start-up on an ambitious crusade to turn home 
 Wi-Fi connections into wireless hotspots for nearby users, is set to unveil 
 on Monday a plan to hand out 1 million wireless routers for just $5 apiece.

  FON, which aims to create a network of home users and small businesses 
 to resell wireless access to passersby, said on Sunday it will subsidize $60 
 Cisco (CSCO) Linksys or Buffalo routers for $5 in the United States or 5 
 euros in Europe.

  Routers are small boxes users connect to cable or telephone Internet 
 connections to broadcast wireless signals to nearby devices, inside a home, 
 business or surrounding neighborhood.

  Juergen Urbanski, North American general manager, said FON, which in 
 February raised $21.7 million from backers, including the founders of Google 
 (GOOG) and Skype, is looking to turn the brand-name equipment into what it 
 calls social routers.

  The goal of the Madrid-based company is to build block-by-block networks 
 of shared wireless connections around the globe, turning local Wi-Fi users 
 into an army of foneros - its term for people who share wireless access.

  As the company's name implies, FON aims to provide wireless Internet 
 access not just to computer users but also for mobile phones and the latest 
 portable gaming devices as they roam.

  (Story continues below)







From: Kevin Owen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 11:05 AM
To: 'Mike Hall'
Subject: FW: Wireless In Washington










From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 8:53 AM
To: webmaster; omimo
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Wireless In Washington



Hiya,

Comments below.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message -
From: webmaster
To: omimo
Cc: Marlon Schafer
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: Wireless In Washington


I have forwarded your inquiry for reply.

Mary
- Original Message -
From: omimo
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 2:49 PM
Subject: Wireless In Washington


Hi,

I was really encouraged by your experiences starting up a wireless network 
service.



mks:  Thanks!



I'm about to move to a house near Uniontown WA.



mks:  Cool.  You'll like it there.

I am sad because I have to give up my connection that I 'borrow' from my 
landlord thanks to a small repeater sitting on his kitchen windowsill and a 
converted steel salad bowl with my D-Link USB unit attached. Range: 150 yards 
with 56Mbps to his home network.



mks:  Grin

I was so proud of that hack.



mks:  Big grin!

My new place is about 8km from one of the local providers antenna's and 13km 
from anther one. The provider is First Step Internet out of Moscow, ID.



mks:  Coolness.  I know those guys.  Good people.  Great network.  I've cc'd 
Kevin from fsr for you.

They have a 1.5 mbps connection for $35/month but want me to use their Trango 
5.3/5.8GHz antenna and a modem of their own spec that they want to sell to me.
In addition to a $600 setup fee.



mks:  H.  You sure that's the going deal for a residential connection?  
Sounds like a business one to me.  Still pretty cheap though, have you ever 
paid for a connection to the telco?  

Re: [WISPA] Why's WISPA silent about this? 2 diferent issues at hand

[John J. Thomas]

I think the general thinking is that WISP's shouldn't have to pay to make the 
Governments' job easier...

John 


-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 5, 2006 11:29 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Why's WISPA silent about this? 2 diferent issues at hand

I want to preface this email with the statement that I ABSOLUTELY DO NOT 
support this law, it is an invasion of privacy and places an undue 
burden of responsibility on an ISP.

Now that being said, as I read the article, and as some have pointed out 
the information being requested for archive is merely websites visited 
and email address sent to. This information is trivial to gather and 
really not that burdensome to archive. I currently run about 4Mbps-5Mbps 
of traffic from 8am to midnight and a months worth of these logs 
uncompressed only takes up about 7G of space. Compression will save me 
60% of that so it is more like 3G for a month of 4-5Mbps. This fits 
nicely on a single DVD-R for achiving once a month. Even scaling this up 
to 30X the traffic for a DVD/day gets you 120-150Mbps daily average traffic.

Your total cost on something like this would be
1. a Mikrotik box (or any router that supports the netflow protocol) to 
sit right before your edge router (or as your edge router).
2. A PC to capture the data with a DVD+-R drive total cost  $500.
3. And then a spindle of DVD media at ~ $15/100 DVDs.

This puts the grand total in at well under $2000 one time cost and then 
whatever personnel cost you want to assign to burning a DVD once a 
month, or if you are lucky enough to have enough customers to require 
120Mbps, once a day.

I think it is important if we are going to draft something up to address 
this issue that we address it with facts. For most ISPs coming up with 
the money to achieve this while a PITA is not going to cause the 
business to go bankrupt. I achieved this using equipment I already have 
in place. My DS3 MT router sends the netflow data to the box I use for 
system/network monitoring. I currently do not archive this data to DVD 
because I have only been collecting it for a month, but I highly doubt I 
will unless required to by law. The only reason I collect this data is 
for IP accounting and troubleshooting and will probably keep no more 
than a month or two of the full data. But it sure comes in handy when a 
customer calls up and says that they haven't had internet for the past 2 
weeks and I can pull up the charts that show they have. Or they say that 
things have been running real slow lately and I can look at the flow 
data and see that their kids have been using P2P applications or doing 
large FTP downloads.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

Butch Evans wrote:
 On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, George Rogato wrote:

 1) Does the government have a right to know the actions of Americans 
 on the internet?

 This is not really at issue. At least it is not really of any concern 
 for us here.

 2) Is this a responsibility of the ISP to bear the burden of 
 gathering this information or should the burden be carried by the 
 feds themselves with little or no cost to the ISP?

 THIS is the real issue that ISPs face. The problem that we all have 
 with this is multifaceted. First, (and perhaps most importantly) is 
 the cost that many ISPs will face to comply with the requirements. In 
 many cases, this cost will be both direct (for hardware) and indirect 
 (network reconfiguration). Also, many ISPs are set up in such a way 
 that compliance will be nearly impossible. Let me provide just a 
 couple examples.

 First, many ISPs use private IP space internally for their customers. 
 For these ISPs, any monitoring done by an outside entity (i.e. ATT) 
 will be completely useless.

 Another example, would be the many ISPs that have several diverse 
 networks. I have several customers that have 3 or 4 distinct networks 
 (one has 8). These ISPs would be required to store this data in either 
 one location, or purchase the equipment for each network.

 It is my belief that WISPA should create a stance against any 
 requirement for WISPs to store customer traffic patterns for any 
 period. The very idea is hideously un-American in the first place. Be 
 that as it may, it is technically difficult, and financially unfair 
 for many smaller ISPs to have to store this information at all.

 This thread started out as we should not be allowing the government 
 to know our every move. This is a political discussion that can not 
 and should not be decided by an ISP, but rather the entire country. 
 We don't have any jurisdiction on issues such as this.

 George, this is one area where we disagree. This is NOT a political 
 discussion. This is an issue that directly impacts every ISP 
 (wireless or wired). It is, perhaps, true that the political 
 implications are what Mark was driving at, but the issue at hand is 
 NOT political in nature. It IS financial and technical.

 We do 

Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[John J. Thomas]

-Original Message-
From: George [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 09:02 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

John J. Thomas wrote:
 inline...


 First off, the WISPs have to have the guts to talk to the city. Many simply 
 refuse to do so, and are probably going to get the Muni WiFi shoved down 
 their throats.


I don't want to turn this into a battle of ideals.

George, you are welcome to believe anything that you want. Here are some facts;
1. I work for Clare Computer Solutions and we are a Cisco Mesh certified 
network Integrator.
2. Cities have approached US to install their networks
3. These cities are not San Francisco sized, they are probably populations 
100,000 and smaller.
4. They are spending the money to put in infrastructure for City workers, 
first. Many are looking at providing Internet access second.



But how many local wisps have been chosen to date?
I bet Joe laura in NO got passed over without much consideration to him.
Joe is on this list, let him chime in here.

 Second, the cities are mostly going to use 2.4 GHz for access and 5.7-5.8 
 GHz for backhauls. WISP's will need to use 5.25-5.25 GHz and 900 MHz.


Almost every wisp today is using 2.4 to reach the customer and 5 gig for
infrastructure and high end customers. Are you saying that wisps have to
move off the existing spectrum and replace their equipment?

I am not saying that WISPS have to move off of 2.4. I am saying that if WISPs 
want to provide top quality service, then they may need to move off of 2.4 as 
it is getting crowded in lots of areas.


 In a word, service. The city will only be offering WiFi access-period. They 
 won't be going out to peoples houses and doing installs, fixing virii, doing 
 firewalls, etc.


Here is a scenario, if a potential customer who is on the fence while
deciding to go to broadband was to hear that a new muni free wifi system
is going to come on line or he can buy now with his local wisp, which
choice is the average consumer going to make?

Most are going to try the muni first. Some are going to be unsatisfied and will 
look for a better deal. I'll give you an example. I had 384k SDSL to my house 
and it was costing me $152 per month. In order to save money, I dropped the 
SDSL in favor of a cable modem. The cable modem can do 6 meg down and about 
384k up for $43 per month and has been verified by DSLreports. Even my wife 
thinks the SDSL was better, I just couldn't afford it anymore. If someone in 
Antioch CA were even offering wireless service at $42 per month, I would be 
there. There is a subset of people that want quality, and are willing to pay 
for it. Two questions come up-can you deliver and are there enough to keep you 
from starving?




The support scenario happens long after the fact.

George
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[John J. Thomas]

Cities don't want home brew, they generally want something that says Cisco on 
the side. Every city that we ahve recently talked to either has a Cisco 
Catalyst 6500 at teh core or has written a RFP to buy a switch that directly 
indicates a Catalyst 6500. Note, I am talking about cities with populationd of  
25,000 and larger, I can't speak for the smaller towns.

John


-Original Message-
From: chris cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 10:00 AM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

Why not just buy the cards, boards, antennas and make a few yourself?

c

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jeffrey Thomas
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 12:46 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

Then there are companies like airmatrix that charge less than 1k per
node.
The key with mesh is density, and many mesh startup's fail because they
Underbuild their networks.

-

Jeff



On 4/24/06 7:53 AM, John J. Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I don't know what equipment they are using, but Cisco AP1500's (mesh)
are
 abnout $3700 each and Cisco recommends 18-20 per square mile. Thats
$74,000
 for the boxes plus antennas, mounts, POE and install.

 John


 -Original Message-
 From: chris cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 07:26 AM
 To: ''WISPA General List''
 Subject: RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

 $173K per mile build out cost?  Somebody just bought a new boat..

 c

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
 Behalf Of George
 Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 10:08 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060424/ap_on_hi_te/muni_wi_fi_hiccups

 I am not a fan of muni wireless.

 George
 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 --
 Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.4.1/312 - Release Date:
4/14/2006


 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.4.1/312 - Release Date: 4/14/2006

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[John J. Thomas]

So, in Atlanta, the trees are so dense that a 5 GHz radio putting out 26 dBm 
into a 7.5 dB omni can't go 2500 feet?

John



-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 10:53 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

Jack Unger wrote:

 A multi-band mesh node does the backhaul on 5 GHz (sometimes with more 
 than one 5 GHz radio). This reduces (but certainly doesn't eliminate) 
 the 2.4 GHz self-interference and other-network-interference level.

You can't use 5 Ghz to go through trees here in Atlanta, so that won't 
help you. Multi-band mesh nodes simple don't work here.

-Matt

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[John J. Thomas]

I don't know what equipment they are using, but Cisco AP1500's (mesh) are 
abnout $3700 each and Cisco recommends 18-20 per square mile. Thats $74,000 for 
the boxes plus antennas, mounts, POE and install.

John


-Original Message-
From: chris cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 07:26 AM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

$173K per mile build out cost?  Somebody just bought a new boat..

c

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 10:08 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060424/ap_on_hi_te/muni_wi_fi_hiccups

I am not a fan of muni wireless.

George
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.4.1/312 - Release Date: 4/14/2006


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[John J. Thomas]

inline...
-Original Message-
From: George [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 07:40 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

I am doubting that wisps can actually accomadate the muni in most 
situations, unless they are closely involved with the design of the 
network, Talking spectrum use here.

First off, the WISPs have to have the guts to talk to the city. Many simply 
refuse to do so, and are probably going to get the Muni WiFi shoved down their 
throats.

Second, the cities are mostly going to use 2.4 GHz for access and 5.7-5.8 GHz 
for backhauls. WISP's will need to use 5.25-5.25 GHz and 900 MHz.



As for going along with free muni wifi, How is a wisp going to operate 
if a muni is offering for free or at cut rate pricing?

In a word, service. The city will only be offering WiFi access-period. They 
won't be going out to peoples houses and doing installs, fixing virii, doing 
firewalls, etc.



And how are they going to expand if the spectrum is used up all over the 
place with unlicensed omni's on every corner.

George

Jack Unger wrote:
 Unfortunately, this may be one of the first of many such muni problems 
 that I've been forcasting for years. Muni wireless can be done correctly 
 and WISPs (IMHO) should always try (when allowed) to play a positive 
 role in proper network design and operation however most muni networks 
 are incorrectly designed by people with limited wireless experience 
 (yes, that even includes some mesh network vendors) which will lead to 
 network failure, waste of taxpayer money, and possible loss of jobs on 
 the part of the city IT folks (not to mention the elected officials) who 
 backed the networks without first learning about how wireless technology 
 really works.
   jack
 
 George wrote:
 
 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060424/ap_on_hi_te/muni_wi_fi_hiccups

 I am not a fan of muni wireless.

 George
 
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Tech Support Call Center Interest ?

[John J. Thomas]

This sounds like it could have potential. I'm sure that most WISPs would like 
to take a vacation sometime  :-)  

The main problem I see is how does an ISP give them enough info to be useful, 
while not letting people deep into his network?

If this is just level 1 stuff, then network maps, ip addresses, routes and 
types of equipment would probably do.

John

-Original Message-
From: Rick Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2006 10:13 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tech Support Call Center Interest ?

tanks for the input...granted, diversity makes it tough.

But, there's something common to them all, on a level 1 basis...

when in doubt, reboot...check cables...check power...etc...

I wouldn't do this blind, I'd ask for customer names, IP's, first ping, 
second ping test, etc..

It would have to be a generic test at least on the first level.  2nd 
level tech could
get a little more detailed, but you're right - 3 to 5 minutes and you 
determine a
truck roll or not.

I'm thinking of doing this to relieve the WISP from the B.S. daily grind 
stuff - idiot users
and common troubleshooting - giving them something on a 2nd or 3rd level 
reference
to work with instead of wasting their precious time.

Something to contemplate I'm sure.

Thanks

R


David E. Smith wrote:

Rick Smith wrote:

  

Having experience in both call center mangement and tech support
department
creation / operations and management, I've got half a mind to sit a
couple of
technical people down and start up a technical support call center and
answering service, with WISPs and ISPs in mind...



I'd feel sorry for the folks answering the phones, because they'd have to
know about a squillion different wireless systems.

Hm. Okay, Mr. Sixpack. Before I can help you, just a few quick questions.
First, is your ISP using Alvarion, Karlnet, Trango, Mikrotik, StarOS, or
Waverider towers?

(And that's just the stuff in MY network. Now take that kind of diversity
and multiply it by a couple hundred WISPs and your phone guys are gonna
have headaches and a ten-foot stack of manuals on their desks.)

Not to mention the fact that every WISP I've seen has different, and
mostly-incompatible ways of doing things. I've seen networks that use DHCP
for everything, RFC1918 overlay networks, static IPs, static IPs assigned
through DHCP, places where the whole network is NATted behind someone's
DSL line, and so on and so on.

For some of those network setups, it would be darn near impossible to give
someone not in the office/NOC the necessary access to even try to
troubleshoot a problem.

And honestly, at least in my office, most wireless issues are either
solved in five minutes, or they require a service call.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there's a market for this, and I wish you all
the best. I just suspect, in my usual pessimistic way, that it'd be a lot
harder to do than you might think.

David Smith
MVN.net
  

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

[John J. Thomas]

Yes, when you start working with Cities and giving them good service, they 
remember  It is nice to have someone call you asking for service because 
Mr. x from another city liked your work.

John

-Original Message-
From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 9, 2006 08:33 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

I do not have the  link to the proceeding but t is known as 04-186 and a 
quick Google should get you to it. It is on the FCC.gov website 
someplace. Anyone have a link to it? The power limits are spelled out 
there I believe. The public process on 04-186 is complete now. We will 
have what we have according to that proceeding. It is a good rulemaking 
for us. I think we should be able to ask for some adaptations in the 
future which could allow for some protections if we show substantial use 
of the band for public safety, government, economic development and 
general good of the public. Most of you guys already do this so it 
should be easy. For those of you who have not tapped into the killer 
application of public safety (police cars, firetrucks, civil defense, 
disaster preparedness, etc.) you need to get with the program. If you 
become the best friend of the head of your (EOC) Emergency Operations 
Center for your county then you will have a ticket to do most anything 
you need to protect and serve using good spectrum in your community. I 
whole heartedly believe this is the path to entrenching us into the 
fabric of communications from now on in our service areas.
Cheers,
Scriv


Dylan Oliver wrote:

Has there been any word on what the power limitations in the
whitespace band will be? Or is this up to the FCC when the bills pass?
I wish the band was WISP-only, and registered like 3650 to keep things
proper.

Thanks,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
  

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

[John J. Thomas]

It is a little strange to have a few MHz be left out, but with that range, who 
cares? This will make for some very cool possibilities...


John


-Original Message-
From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 7, 2006 09:24 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for ALL 
tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is wrong with 
that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I am sorry for 
the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the purpose of the bill. 
Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have happened. Dawn DiPietro, 
can you please send me contact information on the press outlet that sent 
out the previous information? It is time for us to SUPPORT this bill If 
you need help with language let me know but apparently I am not much 
help as I told you guys the wrong position on this one.. I learned a 
valuable lesson here gang. I will never again send out any notices to 
all of you for action prior to reading the ACTUAL bill and not just what 
he news tells us it is. I am very, very sorry for this terrible mix up. 
Please forgive me.
Scriv


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

*

A BILL

*

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

other areas, and for other purposes.

//

/Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

//

/tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

**

*SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

for Communities Act’’.

2

**

*SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

**

*FOR WIRELESS USE. *

Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

(47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

the following:

**

*‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

**

*MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

**

*SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

(1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

available under section 342 of the Communications

Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

including wireless broadband devices; and

(2) establish rules and procedures to—

(A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

cluding broadcast television and public safety

equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

3

from harmful interference from such unlicensed

devices;

(B) address complaints from licensed

broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

ference that include verification, in the field, of

actual harmful interference;

(C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

actual harmful interference to the extent that

harmful interference is found by the Commis-

sion which may include disabling or modifying

the unlicensed device remotely; and

(D) require certification of unlicensed de-

vices designed to be operated in that spectrum

to ensure that they meet the technical criteria

established under paragraph (1) and can per-

form the functions described in subparagraph

(C).

March 31, 2006 (3:22 PM)



*From:* John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Sent:* Fri 07/04/2006 15:07
*To:* Frannie Wellings
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] TV spectrum

I need a copy of this bill right away.
Scriv


Frannie Wellings wrote:

  Hey John,
 
  The Inslee bill is a good bill - it doesn't do what you're saying
  here. I'm not sure what you've read, but it opens up spectrum between
  54-698 MHz (except 608-614) for unlicensed use just like one of the
  Senate bills. He's introduced it as a House companion bill. The only
  difference is a bit of additional language about protection from
  interference.
 
  This is legislation we need to support. Can you review the bill and
  get back to me? If you don't have the text I can send it over. I'm out
  of town, but could get a copy to send to you.
 
  Best, Frannie
 
 
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

[John J. Thomas]

Thanks for the link, it seemed kind of strange why that little slice of 6 MHz 
was left out.

John


-Original Message-
From: Dawn DiPietro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2006 06:43 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

All,

I guess at this point I am at a loss of words. The original press 
release with contact info was posted in my first email.
Did the contact person at the TIA ever get back to you about the press 
release? What should be done in the future
to avoid a situation like this?

I was under the impression there were people on this list to make 
corrections when the media passes on misinformation.
We do need to thank Frannie for clearing this up.

Below is a link to explain why 608-614 Mhz spectrum cannot be used for 
wireless broadband.
http://www.medical.philips.com/us/products/patient_monitoring/products/philips_telemetry_system/index.html

   Philips Telemetry System (608-614 MHz)
Fresh capabilities for our proven system (operating at 
608-614 MHz)
Philips classic telemetry systems are installed in 
thousands of healthcare facilities around the world, and they have 
proven both
durable and adaptable for over a decade. Upgraded 
transmitters combine standard and EASI derived 12-lead ECG* monitoring
on a single device, run on AA batteries, and provide 
audio feedback for many tasks. They’re also upgradeable to run on our 
cellular
telemetry system.

Apologies to all,
Dawn DiPietro

John Scrivner wrote:

 We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
 wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for 
 ALL tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is wrong 
 with that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I am 
 sorry for the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the purpose 
 of the bill. Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have happened. 
 Dawn DiPietro, can you please send me contact information on the press 
 outlet that sent out the previous information? It is time for us to 
 SUPPORT this bill If you need help with language let me know but 
 apparently I am not much help as I told you guys the wrong position on 
 this one.. I learned a valuable lesson here gang. I will never again 
 send out any notices to all of you for action prior to reading the 
 ACTUAL bill and not just what he news tells us it is. I am very, very 
 sorry for this terrible mix up. Please forgive me.
 Scriv


 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

 the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

 *

 A BILL

 *

 To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

 expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

 other areas, and for other purposes.

 //

 /Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

 //

 /tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

 **

 *SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

 for Communities Act’’.

 2

 **

 *SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

 **

 *FOR WIRELESS USE. *

 Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

 (47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

 the following:

 **

 *‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

 **

 *MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

 ‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

 band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

 than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

 Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

 cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

 **

 *SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

 Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

 Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

 (1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

 ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

 the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

 available under section 342 of the Communications

 Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

 including wireless broadband devices; and

 (2) establish rules and procedures to—

 (A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

 cluding broadcast television and public safety

 equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

 3

 from harmful interference from such unlicensed

 devices;

 (B) address complaints from licensed

 broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

 using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

 ference that include verification, in the field, of

 actual harmful interference;

 (C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

 devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

 to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

 actual harmful interference to the extent that

 harmful interference is found by the Commis-

 sion which may include disabling or modifying

 the unlicensed device remotely; and

 (D) require 

Re: [WISPA] Cisco Mesh Equipment

[John J. Thomas]

All of the above

The controller has RSSI, several graphs, both current and historical, other APs 
seen, and a few other things we haven't completely dug into.

When we get back down there, I will get a list of all the monitoring it 
supports and give a better review.

John



-Original Message-
From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2006 05:56 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cisco Mesh Equipment

Define monitoring?

Up down status, or real time and historical data of link characteristics and 
health?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: John J. Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cisco Mesh Equipment



If it would stop raining..


We don't have it all deployed yet, but here is what we know.

They take a long time to boot, maybe 5 minutes.

The range is poor, they are supposed to put out 26 dBm per Cisco, but they 
only put out 14 dBm per the controller interface. We questioned Cisco on 
this, and they calimed that the 26 dB was the total of transmit + receive. 
We are going to try to get an engineer to tell us what the radio is and what 
the REAL output power is. If the power is truly on 14 dBm, that is not good.

The 2.4 radios ar supposed to put out 25 dBm, but the controller interface 
is only showing 17 dBm max. We are hoping that this is a limit in the BIOS 
that can be changed.


We had 1 link at 3600 feet with 1 tree in the way. 7.5 dB omni on each end 
and no link. As soon as another engineer put a 1500 (Mesh AP) in his car and 
got between the other two, the link came up. This is with one end on a 
firehouse at about 35 feet and the other on a light pole at about 26 feet or 
so.

The monitoring is not what we expected-there doesn't seem to be any way to 
monitor the 5 GHz backhauls, but the monitoring of the 2.4 is very good.

We are waiting on the city to put in some long-range ethernet links between 
the stoplights so we will actually have something to bridge.

They currently only use 5.7-5.8 GHz, but 4.9 is supposed to be available 
later this year.



John






-Original Message-
From: Dylan Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2006 06:09 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

John,

It's now April 5th. How are you faring with the Cisco mesh gear?

On 3/1/06, John J. Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 The Cisco radios can do 4.9-5.8 GHz. I am assuming that 5.3-5.7 will be 
 available in a update, since 4.9 is available now. Cisco apparently only 
 has 6-8 deployments so far, and they are releasing updates regularly.

 Our install is tentatively scheduled for March 14th, so I should be able 
 to post info shortly thereafter.

Best,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] phone-to-voip-to-ethernet conversion

[John J. Thomas]

PBXFXOmoduleEthernetWirelessBridgeWirelessBridgeEthernetFXS module

Here is one example, Google will probably get you cheaper ones


John


-Original Message-
From: Mario Pommier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2006 10:57 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] phone-to-voip-to-ethernet conversion

I have an interesting application, that maybe someone has tried:

Customer is expanding to a remote office, across the street from the 
main office.
They need to connect voice and data between the two.
There's clear LOS, so a wireless link will work.
The telephone PBX is at the main office, of course.
I need to send avoice line across the wireless link from the main office 
to the remote one.
How do I add the voice?  Couldn't I simply do this?

PBX [telephone cord][Linksys VoIP phone]-[switch (which 
also has an uplink to the wired network)][wireless radio]

On the other side of the link, the telephone cord would go into a 
desktop phone terminal.

Thanks.

Mario
---
[This e-mail was scanned for viruses by our AntiVirus Protection System]

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Cisco Mesh Equipment

[John J. Thomas]

If it would stop raining..


We don't have it all deployed yet, but here is what we know.

They take a long time to boot, maybe 5 minutes.

The range is poor, they are supposed to put out 26 dBm per Cisco, but they only 
put out 14 dBm per the controller interface. We questioned Cisco on this, and 
they calimed that the 26 dB was the total of transmit + receive. We are going 
to try to get an engineer to tell us what the radio is and what the REAL output 
power is. If the power is truly on 14 dBm, that is not good.

The 2.4 radios ar supposed to put out 25 dBm, but the controller interface is 
only showing 17 dBm max. We are hoping that this is a limit in the BIOS that 
can be changed.


We had 1 link at 3600 feet with 1 tree in the way. 7.5 dB omni on each end and 
no link. As soon as another engineer put a 1500 (Mesh AP) in his car and got 
between the other two, the link came up. This is with one end on a firehouse at 
about 35 feet and the other on a light pole at about 26 feet or so.

The monitoring is not what we expected-there doesn't seem to be any way to 
monitor the 5 GHz backhauls, but the monitoring of the 2.4 is very good.

We are waiting on the city to put in some long-range ethernet links between the 
stoplights so we will actually have something to bridge.

They currently only use 5.7-5.8 GHz, but 4.9 is supposed to be available later 
this year.



John






-Original Message-
From: Dylan Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2006 06:09 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

John,

It's now April 5th. How are you faring with the Cisco mesh gear?

On 3/1/06, John J. Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 The Cisco radios can do 4.9-5.8 GHz. I am assuming that 5.3-5.7 will be 
 available in a update, since 4.9 is available now. Cisco apparently only has 
 6-8 deployments so far, and they are releasing updates regularly.

 Our install is tentatively scheduled for March 14th, so I should be able to 
 post info shortly thereafter.

Best,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Switch Recomendation

[John J. Thomas]

Look at Cisco Catalyst 500 series or HP Procurve series.

John

-Original Message-
From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 11:50 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Switch Recomendation 

I need a recommendation for a 12 port switch that handles a high amount 
of packet per second and has qos for voip.
Cost isn't an issue.

Anyone have a suggestion?

Thanks
George
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] USF fund reform

[John J. Thomas]

In some rural areas, it can be tough to do it in 1 to 5 years. What if you need 
to provide service to the 2 houses that are 15 miles from your current tower 
and there is 0 potential for growth? This would allow you to charge enough for 
long enough that you don't have to lose money. How about 5-10 years for build 
out?  I can't think of too many scenarios where you couldn't do it in 10 years.

John

-Original Message-
From: Jeromie Reeves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 12:30 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF fund reform

10 to 20 year time line? I would like to see 1 to 5 years. I do not see 
how a network can not be profitable
in that time frame with free monies.

Jeromie

Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:

 Hi All,

 Here's what WISPA is prepared to submit to the commerce committee.
 Thought you guys would like a peek at it first.



 WISPA USF Reform Position Paper



WISPA is a the WISP industry's only industry owned and
 operated trade association.  We're a 501c6 corporation with a 7
 person, membership elected board.



The goals for USF should be clarified.  Are laptops for
 kids part of the program goals?  Was it the original intent that USF
 exclude small local entrepreneurs and give preferential treatment to
 the incumbent? As USF changes, do the changes have a clear goal?  Is
 this just a mechanism to try to put more funds into the program
 otherwise leave it as is?  Or does Congress want to see substantial
 changes in the program that do more to foster rather than stifle
 innovation?



WISPA believes that market forces should mostly be left to 
 their own.  Without government tweaking.  USF should be canceled
 completely.  If a real need for outside funding in regions or small
 pockets turns out to be needed, address those issues on a case by case
 basis.  At the very least the USF program needs major reform as its
 cost based fee structure encourages abuse.



An example of artificially high costs would be in Odessa,
 Washington.  In the early 2000 time frame the local telco replaced an 
 8 T-1 microwave link with a fiber optic line at a cost (or so we've
 been told) of $600,000.  Even at the time, the cost of a microwave
 replacement with more capacity would have been half or less.  This is 
 for a town of 1000 that's not on the way to anywhere.  The telco is
 now in the process of adding more fiber to complete a fiber loop to
 other areas.  This next 30 mile stretch is through many solid rock
 canyons and the costs are expected to be even higher.



This same telco has installed $60,000 DSL systems in rural 
 areas that have fewer than 15 houses within 18,000 feet of the hut.
 Clearly these are cost raising mechanisms.



We understand that USF is not likely to go away at this
 time. The above telco gets 2/3rds of its income via subsidies and
 would not likely survive without them.  Leaving such business
 practices in place permanently is not good public policy though.



WISPA proposes that a time limit on the USF program be
 instituted.  Expand the program to include all communications
 companies and use USF to help them build an infrastructure.  Once that
 system is built, it needs to stand on its own two legs though.  If it 
 doesn't, then that's the company's fault and they can live with the
 results of the network they built.  Somewhere between 10 and 20 years 
 should allow plenty of time for efficient network upgrades or
 construction.  The program should not be viewed as a permanent profit 
 line item for companies but rather be a short term
 capitalization/construction fund that will end and leave the company
 standing (or not) on its own  two feet at a set specific date.



 We believe that opening up USF to all operators would likely cause
 multiple networks to be built at the same time and the most efficient 
 ones would survive.  If, after USF was discontinued some areas were
 left with no viable options for service those specific cases could be 
 addressed under some more targeted program.  Funds should be collected
 and distributed based on customers serviced.  This would help prevent 
 speculation with the funds, rather the funds would reward those that
 have already stepped up to the plate.  Tying fund distribution with
 the FCC form 477 would also likely help lead to more accurate market
 data availability.



 WISPA also believes that USF's goals should be readdressed.  We don't 
 believe that using USF funds to provide laptop computers to 68,000 7th
 and 8th graders in Massachusetts is a proper use of the program.



 We would also like to see some changes in the way that USF is
 distributed. The E-Rate program excludes almost all entrepreneurial
 providers.  In some areas the local WISP offers greater service levels
 for less cost than the local hospital or school is paying via the
 E-Rate programs.  We're not allowed to 

Re: [WISPA] USF fund reform

[John J. Thomas]

Are you willing to put up a tower to serve 2 customers? Only if you think you 
can get your money back.

John


-Original Message-
From: KyWiFi LLC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 01:11 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF fund reform

I agree, I would think that 12 months is plenty long enough,
definitely not more than 36 months. Take our company for
example, we deployed 7 broadcast sites in our first 12 months
of operation and we were profitable by month number 8 or 9
and this was WITHOUT any free money. If a company in
this line of work cannot achieve a profit in their first year or
two of operation, I don't see them being around long term.


Sincerely,
Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder
KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky
http://www.KyWiFi.com
http://www.KyWiFiVoice.com
Phone: 859.274.4033
A Broadband Phone  Internet Provider

==
Wireless Broadband, Local Calling and
UNLIMITED Long Distance only $69!

No Taxes, No Regulatory Fees, No Hassles

FREE Site Survey: http://www.KyWiFi.com
==


- Original Message - 
From: Jeromie Reeves [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF fund reform


10 to 20 year time line? I would like to see 1 to 5 years. I do not see 
how a network can not be profitable
in that time frame with free monies.

Jeromie

Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:

 Hi All,

 Here's what WISPA is prepared to submit to the commerce committee.  
 Thought you guys would like a peek at it first.



 WISPA USF Reform Position Paper



WISPA is a the WISP industry's only industry owned and 
 operated trade association.  We're a 501c6 corporation with a 7 
 person, membership elected board.



The goals for USF should be clarified.  Are laptops for 
 kids part of the program goals?  Was it the original intent that USF 
 exclude small local entrepreneurs and give preferential treatment to 
 the incumbent? As USF changes, do the changes have a clear goal?  Is 
 this just a mechanism to try to put more funds into the program 
 otherwise leave it as is?  Or does Congress want to see substantial 
 changes in the program that do more to foster rather than stifle 
 innovation?



WISPA believes that market forces should mostly be left to 
 their own.  Without government tweaking.  USF should be canceled 
 completely.  If a real need for outside funding in regions or small 
 pockets turns out to be needed, address those issues on a case by case 
 basis.  At the very least the USF program needs major reform as its 
 cost based fee structure encourages abuse.



An example of artificially high costs would be in Odessa, 
 Washington.  In the early 2000 time frame the local telco replaced an 
 8 T-1 microwave link with a fiber optic line at a cost (or so we've 
 been told) of $600,000.  Even at the time, the cost of a microwave 
 replacement with more capacity would have been half or less.  This is 
 for a town of 1000 that's not on the way to anywhere.  The telco is 
 now in the process of adding more fiber to complete a fiber loop to 
 other areas.  This next 30 mile stretch is through many solid rock 
 canyons and the costs are expected to be even higher.



This same telco has installed $60,000 DSL systems in rural 
 areas that have fewer than 15 houses within 18,000 feet of the hut.  
 Clearly these are cost raising mechanisms.



We understand that USF is not likely to go away at this 
 time. The above telco gets 2/3rds of its income via subsidies and 
 would not likely survive without them.  Leaving such business 
 practices in place permanently is not good public policy though.



WISPA proposes that a time limit on the USF program be 
 instituted.  Expand the program to include all communications 
 companies and use USF to help them build an infrastructure.  Once that 
 system is built, it needs to stand on its own two legs though.  If it 
 doesn't, then that's the company's fault and they can live with the 
 results of the network they built.  Somewhere between 10 and 20 years 
 should allow plenty of time for efficient network upgrades or 
 construction.  The program should not be viewed as a permanent profit 
 line item for companies but rather be a short term 
 capitalization/construction fund that will end and leave the company 
 standing (or not) on its own  two feet at a set specific date.



 We believe that opening up USF to all operators would likely cause 
 multiple networks to be built at the same time and the most efficient 
 ones would survive.  If, after USF was discontinued some areas were 
 left with no viable options for service those specific cases could be 
 addressed under some more targeted program.  Funds should be collected 
 and distributed based on customers serviced.  This would help prevent 
 

Re: [WISPA] Switch Recomendation

[John J. Thomas]

Generally, you want QOS classifying as close the edges as you can get it. Then 
you want your switches to honor the TOS/COS tags, then you want your edge 
router to police/queue/fragment to your upstream.

John

-Original Message-
From: Rick Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 04:09 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Switch Recomendation

I can't see how having a QOS switch could hurt...with VOIP, QOS in as
many places
as possible can only help...

Paul Hendry wrote:

Is the switch likely to be the bottle neck in your network? Surely you want
QoS enabled routers where bandwidth isn't plentiful.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George
Sent: 29 March 2006 03:50
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Switch Recomendation

Thanks matt and larry.
I have a 2512 procurve that we like and a Dell switch as well.

Who makes the Dell switches for Dell?

Guess what I really want is to make sure that those little voice packets
get the priority :)

George

Matt Liotta wrote:


We've found that you don't really need a QoS capable switch. What is
more important is for the appropriate COS and TOS bits to be set by the
VoIP device(s) in question and have a switch capable of doing the right
thing with those packets. Every enterprise grade switch we have looked
at seems to do the right thing when the bits are set. We've been happy
with Dell switchs for example.

-Matt

George Rogato wrote:



I need a recommendation for a 12 port switch that handles a high
amount of packet per second and has qos for voip.
Cost isn't an issue.

Anyone have a suggestion?

Thanks
George








--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Custom LMR-400 Cables?

[John J. Thomas]

Hyperlink Technologies

http://www.hyperlinktech.com/web/cable_feed400.php

John



-Original Message-
From: Jason Wallace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 05:13 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Custom LMR-400 Cables?

Anyone know where I can get custom lmr-400 cables made that have right 
angle n-type male connectors?

Jason
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] VPN and Router Choices?

[John J. Thomas]

There are a couple of ways to do this.

1. You can use hardware firewalls for site-to-site VPN.

2. You can use hardware firewalls and terminate them to a Windows or Linux 
server for a site-to-ste VPN.

What performance level do you want?
How secure does it need to be?
How much bandwidth do they have?
How much traffic do they want going through the tunnel?

John



-Original Message-
From: Bo Hamilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 07:52 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] VPN and Router Choices?

Hello list,
Im looking at setting up some VPN's and I have looked at many routers that
claim ease of use.  Linksys, NetGear, D-Link and so on.  I was wondering if
someone could tell me what is the easiest router for setup.

Also, does one have to have a VPN server( i.e Windows or Linux) or does the
router take place of this for remote connections.

The senario I have is one central office with 2 satalite offices that
connect to central.  The central office having the main VPN router.  I want
to have the two seperate locations seen in the network neighborhood.

Would this be a router to router VPN?  If so what are the easiest one's to
configure.

Im new to the VPN world so go easy on me.   :)

Thanks in advance,

Bo Hamilton
NCOWireless.com



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

[John J. Thomas]

The Cisco radios can do 4.9-5.8 GHz. I am assuming that 5.3-5.7 will be 
available in a update, since 4.9 is available now. Cisco apparently only has 
6-8 deployments so far, and they are releasing updates regularly.

Our install is tentatively scheduled for March 14th, so I should be able to 
post info shortly thereafter.

John


-Original Message-
From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 04:14 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

It uses a 5.7-8 GHz radio for backhaul and 2.4 GHz for access.

Thats the first mistake of the gear. It should take advantage of 5.3Ghz and
5.4Ghz, for creating its backhauls.  Using 5.8Ghz for short range backhauls,
just means that they plan to go head to head against Super Cell providers.
Sounds like an Interference battle to me.

I wonder why so many people never listen to the quote I took the road less
travelled, and it made all the difference, Robert Frost.

5.8Ghz is best for Sector deployments that really need the higher power to
blast through obstructions or long haul. So why pick the spectrum most in
demand by everyone else? Unless of course the idea was to deploy sector 
super cell designs as the core to feed the MESH relay points. However, that
wouldn't really be typical mesh topology, (although it may according to 
Cisco's definition :-)

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message -
From: John J. Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 2:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment


We are still waiting to deply Cisco mesh, so I can't vouch for it *yet*. We
will be installing for the City of Gilroy Ca. probably in the next 4 weeks.
This is currently only a partial deployment, but they plan on lighting the
whole city. I can tell you that the equipment is expensive -$3500 per mesh
box but has fantastic specs. It uses a 5.7-8 GHz radio for backhaul and 2.4
GHz for access. As soon as I get the testing done, I promise to share
numbers

John Thomas


-Original Message-
From: ISPlists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 02:32 PM
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com, ''WISPA General List''
Subject: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment.  I have a
small town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire town and I'm
thinking of using mesh technology.  Any ideas would be great.

Thanks,
Steve


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

[John J. Thomas]

There has been so much talk about this, I might be inclined to help the FCC 
find those WISPs that are snubbing their noses at the law. This is a 
professional list and those here should be abiding by the law. I wonder if it 
would be a good thing to kick out those that promote illegal activities?

Whether you like it or not, WISPs will eventually be taxed- I guarantee the 
ILECs will see to that. If the FCC wants you, they will eventually find you.

John Thomas


-Original Message-
From: Frank Muto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 06:20 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/broadband_data_faq.pdf


20. Are there penalties for not filing Form 477?

Entities that are required to file Form 477 but fail to do so may be subject
to the

enforcement provisions of the Communications Act and any other applicable
law. In

particular, the Commission has authority pursuant to sections 502 and 503 of
the

Communications Act to enforce compliance by fine or forfeiture.





Frank Muto
Co-founder -  Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA
Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee
http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us














- Original Message -
From: Bob Moldashel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; Marlon Schafer
(509-982-2181) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st


 OK...OK.

 I agree that all should probably file.  I have several partners so I am
 not the only one to decide so I will leave it at that as it pertains to my
 WISP entity.

 BUT...What is the penalty for not filing  Does anyone know???  Can
 we get an official statement for this situation? Are there fines?
 Penalty's?? Do you get a nasty gram??  Do they not send me a xmas card
 next year??  What???

 It may help bring more compliance or it may result in less filings.
 Either way I think the membership should know.

 Marlon...How about asking some of your contacts.

 -B-

 --
 Bob Moldashel
 Lakeland Communications, Inc.
 Broadband Deployment Group
 1350 Lincoln Avenue
 Holbrook, New York 11741 USA
 800-479-9195 Toll Free US  Canada
 631-585-5558 Fax
 516-551-1131 Cell

 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

[John J. Thomas]

We are still waiting to deply Cisco mesh, so I can't vouch for it *yet*. We 
will be installing for the City of Gilroy Ca. probably in the next 4 weeks. 
This is currently only a partial deployment, but they plan on lighting the 
whole city. I can tell you that the equipment is expensive -$3500 per mesh box 
but has fantastic specs. It uses a 5.7-8 GHz radio for backhaul and 2.4 GHz for 
access. As soon as I get the testing done, I promise to share numbers

John Thomas


-Original Message-
From: ISPlists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 02:32 PM
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com, ''WISPA General List''
Subject: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment.  I have a small 
town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire town and I'm thinking 
of using mesh technology.  Any ideas would be great.

Thanks,
Steve


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

[John J. Thomas]

Yes, unfortunately, the Cisco mesh is only using 5.8 for backhaul right now. 
Since they recommend 16-18 mesh boxes per square mile, 5.25 GHz and up would be 
a much better choice

John


-Original Message-
From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 08:41 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

Tom,

You make a very good point that 5.3 GHz should be used wherever possible 
while reserving 5.8 for longer-distance backhauling and supercell use. 
We should all be thinking in terms of using 5.3 whenever we can and 
reserving the higher-power 5.8 authorization for those situations where 
we really, really need it.
jack

Tom DeReggi wrote:

 Or realize that everyone in the world is using the precious 5.8Ghz 
 spectrum already for long critical links, that are limited to 5.8Ghz for 
 PtP rule higher SU antenna, or long distance.
 5.3Ghz is an ideal backhaul channel for MESH, up to 7 miles (with 2 ft 
 dish), and avoid the interference headaches.  There is now a HUGE range 
 of spectrum available at 1 watt, the 5.3G and 5.4Ghz newly allocated 
 255Mhzspectrum usable as if this past January.  Design mesh networks to 
 utilize these many channel options, avoid interference, and don't 
 destroy the industry by unnecessisarilly using the precious 5.8Ghz.  In 
 a MESH design its rare to need to go distances longer than 2 miles, all 
 within the realm of possibility with low power 5.3G and 5.4G and Omnis 
 and relatively small panel antennas.
 
 Likewise, reserve the precious 2.4Ghz for the link to consumer, the 
 spectrum supported by their laptops.  I hope to see the industry smart 
 enough to use the new 5.4Ghz for MESH type systems, which is one of the 
 reasons it was allocated for.
 
 One of the most important tasks for WISPs is to conserve the 5.8Ghz 
 spectrum and only use it when needed.  It is in shortage most compared 
 to the other ranges. I had hoped and lobbied hard that half of the 
 5.4Ghz range would be allowed for higher power and PtP rules, but it had 
 not. Its still perfect for mesh and OFDM. Don;t be fooled into believing 
 high power is the secret weapon for mesh, as it is not, LOW power is.  
 Interference and noise is accumulative and travels for miles around 
 corners and obstructions, unlike good RSSI and quality signal.  Get 
 better RSSI in MESH, by Reducing self interference and noise, by using a 
 wider range of channel selections and lower power.  5.3 and 5.4 gives 
 you 350Mhz to select channels from, of equal specification/propertied 
 RF.  Design it into your MESH design.  If you can't transport it in 
 1watt, redesign radio install locations and density.  Every single 
 additional non-inteferring channel selection, drastically logrithmically 
 increases the odds of getting a non-interfering channel selection.  5.4G 
 is the best thinng that happened to MESH. Unfortuneately, worthless for 
 super cell design.  But if MESH embrases 5.4 like it should, it leaves 
 5.8Ghz for Super cell.  Otherwise the MESH designer is destined to fail, 
 because it will become a battle that the Super Cell guy won't be able to 
 give up on until his death, as he has no other option but the range he 
 is using.  The mesh provider has options.
 
 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
 
 - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:29 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
 
 
 Unless you expect to handle only very low levels of traffic, avoid 
 mesh nodes with only one radio. Choose nodes that have one radio on 
 2.4 GHz for customer connections and one radio on 5.8 GHz for 
 backhauling. In other words, separate the access traffic from the 
 backhaul traffic. Your overall throughput capability will be many 
 times greater.

 jack


 ISPlists wrote:

 Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment.  I 
 have a small town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire 
 town and I'm thinking of using mesh technology.  Any ideas would be 
 great.
  Thanks,
 Steve


 -- 
 Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
 True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
 Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com



 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
 
 

-- 
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  

Re: [WISPA] Switch recommendations

[John J. Thomas]

Where are these being used?  If it is at the customer edge, it will be 
different than if at your core. The Netgear FS726T runs between 100 and 200 
dollars and supports up to 8000 MAC adresses.

John


-Original Message-


From: Pete Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 07:05 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Switch recommendations

I was wondering what switch has the largest mac address table. I don't 
need more than 6 ports, but the $19.95 cheapy switches that my AP 
Bridges all go into might be hurting my performance, I am thinking. If 
shelling out $100 or so for a good switch makes sense, I am willing to 
get one, but I don't want to spend money where its not needed.

What does the professional ISP use?
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Motel setup

[John J. Thomas]

b tends to be more reliable than g, especially when penetrating walls.

JT


-Original Message-
From: Paul Hendry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 02:33 PM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Motel setup

I notice this kit is 11b only. Is there a specific reason for using 11b for
hotspots instead of 11g? I'm guessing it's because of the greater output
power and receive sensitivity of 11b but isn't OFDM better for bouncing
around the walls of a Hotel?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: 15 February 2006 06:36
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Motel setup

Get about 3 of these things and you should be fine.
http://tranzeo.com/uploaded_images/117_10_5_TR-600f%20Series.pdf

Put ceiling omni's on them I would put one in the center of the
building, and the remaining two towards the ends of the building.



Kurt Fankhauser
WAVELINC
114 S. Walnut St.
Bucyrus, OH 44820
419-562-6405
www.wavelinc.com


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jason Hensley
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 4:59 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Motel setup

What's the currently recommended gear / setup for a motel?  Total of 113
rooms spread over 2 floors.  Going to be a 2-phrase project where the
first
group of rooms will have both Ethernet and Wi-Fi accessibility, with the
remaining to have WiFi only.  No idea yet on the layout of which rooms
will
be Ethernet / WiFi, but that's not really important.  Owner is running
the
Ethernet cabling himself - just looking to contract out the Wireless end
of
it.

I don't know much more than this at the moment.  Not sure on square
footage
or anything - that is to come soon, but thought I'd get some ideas on
equipment to start and then go from there.

Thanks a bunch!

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.7/259 - Release Date:
2/13/2006


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.8/260 - Release Date: 14/02/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.8/260 - Release Date: 14/02/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Neat tool

[John J. Thomas]

I have one, and it works well. This is a very handy tool.

John

-Original Message-
From: Brian Rohrbacher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2006 09:40 PM
To: 'Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization'
Subject: [WISPA] Neat tool

Just found this.  Anyone ever have a tower, silo, rooftop owner ask how 
much electric your gear will use?  This thing is slick.

http://www.ahernstore.com/p4400.html   (if it comes to search box type 
in meter)

Nope, I don't know these people and have no reason to post this other 
than it might just be another tool for the WISP Toolbag
So, unless someone smarter than me thinks this thing is a bad idea, I 
might just get one.

Brian



Sale: *$34.95*pad


  *Kill A Watt Electricty Load Meter and Monitor*

http://www.ahernstore.com/top30.html Kill A Watt Electricty Load Meter 
and Monitor.

*Watts killing you?* Connect your appliances into the P3 Kill A Watt 
Meter, and assess how efficient they are. The Kill A Watt features a 
large LCD display that counts consumption by the Kilowatt-hour just like 
utility companies.

Kill A Watt Meter allows you to figure out your electrical expenses by 
the hour, day, week, month, even an entire year. The Kill A Watt will 
monitor the quality of your power by displaying Voltage, Line Frequency, 
and Power Factor.

-- 
Brian Rohrbacher
Reliable Internet, LLC
www.reliableinter.net
Cell 269-838-8338

Caught up in the Air 1 Thess. 4:17




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/